PDA

View Full Version : No Feats for Psicrystals?



Scipio
2010-05-24, 05:07 PM
There seems to be a lot of people on this forum who believe that psicrystal's get feats as they "advance". I could be wrong on this, but I just don't see anything to suggest this is the case.

Under psicrystal basics it says to "use the statistics for a psicrystal, but make the following changes" The only things mentioned are - saves, abilities and skills. Feats are not mentioned here. There is no advancement line for psicrystals, so they never advance on their own. The HD are equal to the owner, but they do not actually advance except where it says differently.

The common sense test (IMO) is that they would have specifically mentioned feat acquisition if it were true. As a point of comparison, the psicrystal is very similar to a familiar as opposed to say an animal companion (which does get feats). Familiars of course do not get feats.

Am I missing something?

Jarian
2010-05-24, 05:10 PM
You are.

Psicrystals gain hit dice. Ergo, they gain feats.

Familiars do not gain hit dice. Ergo, they do not gain feats.

KillianHawkeye
2010-05-24, 05:12 PM
This is the difference:

For the purpose of effects related to number of Hit Dice, use the master’s character level or the familiar’s normal HD total, whichever is higher.


A psicrystal’s characteristics depend on its master. Its Hit Dice are equal to its master’s Hit Dice (counting only levels in psion or wilder)

Basically, the familiar is "treated as" having HD equal to the master's class level, whereas the psicrystal actually gets those HD (and all the benefits thereof).

tyckspoon
2010-05-24, 05:12 PM
The HD are equal to the owner

It's that line. Unlike familiars, which only have effective HD for purposes of spell interactions, psicrystals get real HD. And HD bring certain benefits just by acquiring them- BAB, skill points, save bonuses, HP, feats, and ability score increases. Saves and Skill points are specifically referred to because they differ from the norm- psicrystals use the master's saves and ranks instead of their own. They don't have to mention feats specifically, because they don't have to mention things that already operate by standard rules.

Lycanthromancer
2010-05-24, 05:13 PM
SWORDSAGE'D!

Common sense says that psicrystals follow the rules just like everyone else.

Hit Dice: As master’s HD (hp ½ master’s) (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/monsters/psicrystal.htm)

Feat Acquisition and Ability Score Increases
A monster’s total Hit Dice, not its ECL, govern its acquisition of feats and ability score increases. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/improvingMonsters.htm)

Anxe
2010-05-24, 05:14 PM
No, you're not missing something. Psicrystals don't get feats. People who say otherwise are like lawyers who follow the letter of a contract instead of the spirit.

Lycanthromancer
2010-05-24, 05:15 PM
No, you're not missing something. Psicrystals don't get feats. People who say otherwise are like lawyers who follow the letter of a contract instead of the spirit.We're following the rules. You're not.

We even quoted them, directly from the SRD.

KillianHawkeye
2010-05-24, 05:19 PM
If they wanted familiars and psicrystals to be exactly the same, they would have written them exactly the same.

Scipio
2010-05-24, 05:20 PM
We're following the rules. You're not.

We even quoted them, directly from the SRD.

As soon as someone quotes the place where full monster advancement is granted to a psicrystal, I will believe them. The text goes into quite a bit of detail regarding what psicrystal's specifically get. No mention of feats anywhere.

Optimator
2010-05-24, 05:25 PM
As soon as someone quotes the place where full monster advancement is granted to a psicrystal, I will believe them. The text goes into quite a bit of detail regarding what psicrystal's specifically get. No mention of feats anywhere.

I believe it's the part where it mentions Psicrystals gain hit dice.

erikun
2010-05-24, 05:30 PM
As a player and a DM, I would not allow the psicrystal to gain feats. As Scipio points out, the psicrystal is apparently supposed to act like a familiar (with different wording to prevent HD-dependent effects from always affecting the psicrystal first) and the monster entry does not give it any extraodinary feats.

Of course, others may play with allowing feats for psicrystals, so you can take this as my houseruling, if you'd like. I just find it odd that the psicrystal entries do not mention feats, when every other similar entry (Druid's campanion, Paladin's mount) does.

Anxe
2010-05-24, 05:33 PM
We're following the rules. You're not.

We even quoted them, directly from the SRD.

"letter of the contract, not the spirit."

Drascin
2010-05-24, 05:35 PM
"letter of the contract, not the spirit."

Now, I usually don't get into these discussions, but, if I may ask, what makes you think that what you believe was the spirit, and not the inverse? I actually hadn't thought of the possibility that Psicrystals didn't advance until I came here and saw people arguing about it. It just seemed pretty evident.

Mugiwara Luffy
2010-05-24, 05:37 PM
They don't have to mention feats specifically, because they don't have to mention things that already operate by standard rules.

this.

it´s like when a creature has the outsider type, they don´t have to mention that they get darkvision

Boci
2010-05-24, 05:37 PM
"letter of the contract, not the spirit."

And how pray do you know what the spirit is?

lightningcat
2010-05-24, 05:40 PM
Now, I usually don't get into these discussions, but, if I may ask, what makes you think that what you believe was the spirit, and not the inverse? I actually hadn't thought of the possibility that Psicrystals didn't advance until I came here and saw people arguing about it. It just seemed pretty evident.

I saw it the exact other way. After all, they are psion familiars, and the greatest disadvantage of familiars is their vulnerability.

jokey665
2010-05-24, 05:42 PM
I saw it the exact other way. After all, they are psion familiars, and the greatest disadvantage of familiars is their vulnerability.

Except they aren't familiars, and if they were... Psions would just get a familiar instead of having this whole new mechanic.

Jarian
2010-05-24, 05:42 PM
Jokey beat me to it. I was being snarky anyway, so it's probably better this way. :smallsigh:

erikun
2010-05-24, 05:44 PM
it´s like when a creature has the outsider type, they don´t have to mention that they get darkvision
Actually, they do.


Now, I usually don't get into these discussions, but, if I may ask, what makes you think that what you believe was the spirit, and not the inverse? I actually hadn't thought of the possibility that Psicrystals didn't advance until I came here and saw people arguing about it. It just seemed pretty evident.
For me, it has been:
Wizard and Sorcerer familiars say nothing about feats.
Paladin mounts specifically say they gain feats.
Druid and Ranger companions specifically say they gain feats.

Psicrystals say nothing about feats, and they share a number of features with familiars. Furthermore, the two examples which gain feats (mounts and companions) have a specific HD advancement on their tables. Psicrystals do not.

Godskook
2010-05-24, 05:45 PM
No, you're not missing something. Psicrystals don't get feats. People who say otherwise are like lawyers who follow the letter of a contract instead of the spirit.

*Checks self* Nope, not a lawyer.

I say otherwise.

And back up your claim that the 'spirit' of the rules means that psicrystals don't get feats. Otherwise, you're not really interested in either the letter or the spirit.

Anxe
2010-05-24, 05:46 PM
Psicrystal is a similar ability to Familiar, Animal Companion, and Special Mount. Animal Companion and Special Mount specifically mention getting feats. That mentioning is curiously left out of Familiar and Psicrystal. Maybe they don't get feats?
Further evidence, the psicrystal in the monster section of Psionics Handbook only has one feat, it's bonus feat. It doesn't have any feats for it's HD.
The psicrystal is meant to be like a familiar. The familiar doesn't get feats, why would you think the psicrystal does? The psicrystal gets HD, so that it can have a higher BAB, not so it can get feats.

EDIT:
"Like a wizard's familiar, psicrystals are a psion's companion." (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20020322a)

Godskook
2010-05-24, 05:47 PM
Actually, they do.

Actually they don't:

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#outsiderType


An outsider possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature’s entry).

* Darkvision out to 60 feet.

Jarian
2010-05-24, 05:49 PM
Psicrystal is a similar ability to Familiar, Animal Companion, and Special Mount. Animal Companion and Special Mount specifically mention getting feats. That mentioning is curiously left out of Familiar and Psicrystal. Maybe they don't get feats?

If you're attempting to argue that they don't gain hitdice by the rules, you'd be wrong. If you're attempting to argue that they don't get feats because the text doesn't mention it... what? Does the Ogre entry mention that bigger Ogres should gain more feats for every 3 hit dice? I mean, seriously.



Further evidence, the psicrystal in the monster section of Psionics Handbook only has one feat, it's bonus feat. It doesn't have any feats for it's HD.
The psicrystal is meant to be like a familiar. The familiar doesn't get feats, why would you think the psicrystal does? The psicrystal gets HD, so that it can have a higher BAB, not so it can get feats.

WotC has specifically said that when stat blocks contradict the rules, the rules are always right.

Yuki Akuma
2010-05-24, 05:50 PM
Psicrystals gain HD as their masters advance. They are not treated as having HD equal to their master's level.

Psicrystals are not familiars.

They do not have some sort of 'special hit dice' that only advance some things and not others. The entry says nothing about what their hit dice advance. Ergo, they are normal hit dice in every way.

Drascin
2010-05-24, 05:51 PM
I saw it the exact other way. After all, they are psion familiars, and the greatest disadvantage of familiars is their vulnerability.

I dunno, I never saw them as being anything like familiars. Perhaps it's because of the way it's fluffed. A Familiar is something external, unimportant, more or less a pet with a couple tricks, something designed from its very inception to be a little independent sidenote. The way psicrystals are explained, they always seemed much more than that to me, more part of a character than the familiar. Hence, them having advancement together with their master just seemed far more intuitive.

To this add the fact that quite a few powers and feats in the very same book give the feeling that completely unlike familiars (at that stage. Decent familiar-enhancing spells came later), Psicrystals were very obviously at least supposed and designed to be actually useful to their owners, or at least mildly capable of assisting in some ways, instead of little useless fluff-balls, and the logic knot was made up in my mind. Simple as that :smallamused:.

EDIT: Multi-ninja'd. Teaches me to go get a sandwich in the middle of writing a post.

erikun
2010-05-24, 05:56 PM
Actually they don't:

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8556651&posted=1#post8556651
You, er, just linked to your previous post.

Although perhaps I was misunderstood. Every outsider creature entry I can find lists Darkvision as a special quality. Every (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/achaierai.htm) single (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/angel.htm) one (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/archon.htm) which (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/arrowhawk.htm) I (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/azer.htm) can (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/barghest.htm) find (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/bralani.htm) in (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/chaosBeast.htm) the (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/couatl.htm) SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/demon.htm). It seems strange that they would be so redundant in something like darkvision (which is stated elsewhere) and yet leave the psicrystals-gain-feats clause implied yet unspoken due to seperate monster creature rules found in another book.

Yuki Akuma
2010-05-24, 06:01 PM
They never say in any other monster entry that they gain feats when they increase their HD.

Never.

tyckspoon
2010-05-24, 06:02 PM
Further evidence, the psicrystal in the monster section of Psionics Handbook only has one feat, it's bonus feat. It doesn't have any feats for it's HD.


Alertness *is* the Psicrystal's 1HD feat. The (Ex) Alertness ability grants the feat to its master; it says nothing about the Psicrystal itself, and the feat on the statblock lacks the superscript B that would mark it as a bonus feat. The only place that feat can come from is the crystal's HD.

Godskook
2010-05-24, 06:02 PM
Psicrystal is a similar ability to Familiar, Animal Companion, and Special Mount. Animal Companion and Special Mount specifically mention getting feats. That mentioning is curiously left out of Familiar and Psicrystal. Maybe they don't get feats?

Curiously, familiar is the worst comparison for the psicrystal because unlike the familiar, the psicrystal gains actual HD, which is more analogues to Companions and Mounts. Maybe the Psicrystal is like them?


Further evidence, the psicrystal in the monster section of Psionics Handbook only has one feat, it's bonus feat. It doesn't have any feats for it's HD.

The psicrystal listed there isn't 'finished'. Its also a non-advanced Psicrystal, suitable for a 1st level Psion(evidenced by the lack of higher psicrystal abilities, such as a Deliver Touch Power). Interpreting that to mean it doesn't get additional feats for additional HD would also mean it wouldn't get additional abilities, such as the aformentioned Deliver Touch Power.


The psicrystal is meant to be like a familiar. The familiar doesn't get feats, why would you think the psicrystal does? The psicrystal gets HD, so that it can have a higher BAB, not so it can get feats.

Where is this statement supported?


EDIT:
"Like a wizard's familiar, psicrystals are a psion's companion." (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20020322a)

Not a primary source. For rules related to Psicrystals, the XPH 'wins' all arguments.


You, er, just linked to your previous post.

Fixed


It seems strange that they would be so redundant in something like darkvision (which is stated elsewhere) and yet leave the psicrystals-gain-feats clause implied yet unspoken due to seperate monster creature rules found in another book.

The existence of reminder text does not imply that reminder text is required.

Anxe
2010-05-24, 06:06 PM
Alertness *is* the Psicrystal's 1HD feat. The (Ex) Alertness ability grants the feat to its master; it says nothing about the Psicrystal itself, and the feat on the statblock lacks the superscript B that would mark it as a bonus feat. The only place that feat can come from is the crystal's HD.

This is most disturbing... I am wrong! You are correct.

And as for Godskook, you're saying Wizards of the Coast isn't a primary source?

Terazul
2010-05-24, 06:07 PM
And as for Godskook, you're saying Wizards of the Coast isn't a primary source?

Not when the link in question refers to the 3.0 Psionics Handbook.

EDIT: Not to mention, that's just the opener flavor text. Yes, they both hang out with their owners. That doesn't mean they operate in the same way mechanically.

Yuki Akuma
2010-05-24, 06:08 PM
And as for Godskook, you're saying Wizards of the Coast isn't a primary source?

Their website is not a primary source for material published in their books. The books are the primary source.

Their website is only the primary source for things that have only been published there.

Anxe
2010-05-24, 06:10 PM
Now, I'm even more confused. But the point of that link was to show that Wizards does consider the psicrystal to be most similar to the familiar ability not animal companion or special mount. It still works even though it's on a website and from an older edition unless something newer contradicts that.

That alertness feat in the monster section not being a bonus one convinced me that they get feats by RAW though.

DragoonWraith
2010-05-24, 06:11 PM
Besides, that statement wouldn't mean anything about them having feats or not even if it was printed in XPH (which it's not) - it's purely a fluff-based comparison, not a statement of mechanical similarity. It's a way of introducing the mechanic to those who are more familiar (ugh) with Familiars. "They're kinda like this thing you know, except they're crystals and they do some things a little differently" - one of those things is feats. They chose Familiar rather than Animal Companion or Mount because the Psion or Wilder is much more similar to a Wizard or Sorcerer than to a Druid or Paladin.

Terazul
2010-05-24, 06:11 PM
Now, I'm even more confused. But the point of that link was to show that Wizards does consider the psicrystal to be most similar to the familiar ability not animal companion or special mount.

Ok, so it's similar. Still not the same.

Lycanthromancer
2010-05-24, 06:12 PM
Further evidence, the psicrystal in the monster section of Psionics Handbook only has one feat, it's bonus feat. It doesn't have any feats for it's HD.Uh...They get Alertness as their first level feat.

The Alertness mentioned in the granted abilities section? That's given to the manifester, which is a totally different bucket of cognizance crystals.

[edit] SWORDSAAAAAGE'D!

NEO|Phyte
2010-05-24, 06:13 PM
Further evidence, the psicrystal in the monster section of Psionics Handbook only has one feat, it's bonus feat. It doesn't have any feats for it's HD.[/URL]
You see that superscripted "B" next to the alertness feat that indicates it's a bonus feat, and not an HD-granted feat?

Yeah, me neither.

Yuki Akuma
2010-05-24, 06:14 PM
Now, I'm even more confused.

The primary source is wherever it appeared first. In the case of rule books, it's the actual book.

What the publisher has to say on the matter outside of errata makes no difference. The primary source is the book - in this case, the Expanded Psionics Handbook.

Godskook
2010-05-24, 06:15 PM
And as for Godskook, you're saying Wizards of the Coast isn't a primary source?

*FACEPALM*

No, I'm saying that:

1.In D&D 3.5, certain books are 'primary sources' for certain things.

2.When two books(or other sources) disagree, the 'primary source' wins.

For example: Say that Complete Warrior says that "Creatures gain feats at the rate of 1 per every 4 hit dice" Doesn't matter, cause gaining feats from HD is something that's laid out in the core books(DMG, PHB, or MM1). CW 'loses', because it is not the primary source.

A 'real world' example would be Rainbow Servant, a prestige class that has 6/10 casting by the table and 10/10 casting by the text. Since text is considered the 'primary source' over tables, Rainbow Servant has 10/10 casting by RAW.

Mugiwara Luffy
2010-05-24, 06:18 PM
You, er, just linked to your previous post.

Although perhaps I was misunderstood. Every outsider creature entry I can find lists Darkvision as a special quality. Every (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/achaierai.htm) single (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/angel.htm) one (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/archon.htm) which (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/arrowhawk.htm) I (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/azer.htm) can (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/barghest.htm) find (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/bralani.htm) in (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/chaosBeast.htm) the (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/couatl.htm) SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/demon.htm). It seems strange that they would be so redundant in something like darkvision (which is stated elsewhere) and yet leave the psicrystals-gain-feats clause implied yet unspoken due to seperate monster creature rules found in another book.

well, not an outsider, but the ghost it´s an undead that doesn´t states specifically darkvision in its template entry...and they get darkvision anyway, because of its traits

Anxe
2010-05-24, 06:22 PM
*FACEPALM*

No, I'm saying that:

1.In D&D 3.5, certain books are 'primary sources' for certain things.

2.When two books(or other sources) disagree, the 'primary source' wins.

For example: Say that Complete Warrior says that "Creatures gain feats at the rate of 1 per every 4 hit dice" Doesn't matter, cause gaining feats from HD is something that's laid out in the core books(DMG, PHB, or MM1). CW 'loses', because it is not the primary source.

A 'real world' example would be Rainbow Servant, a prestige class that has 6/10 casting by the table and 10/10 casting by the text. Since text is considered the 'primary source' over tables, Rainbow Servant has 10/10 casting by RAW.

I would think CW would "win" because it was published sooner.

Boci
2010-05-24, 06:23 PM
I would think CW would "win" because it was published sooner.

It wasn't published sooner, at least not unless you start jumping editions.

Yuki Akuma
2010-05-24, 06:26 PM
I would think CW would "win" because it was published sooner.

...

What?

If you actually mean "later", that's not how it works. Later published books don't replace the core books - even when they present something that replaces an older mechanic, it's only presented as a suggestion.

If you actually meant sooner, what the hell are you smoking and can I have some?

tyckspoon
2010-05-24, 06:28 PM
I would think CW would "win" because it was published sooner.

There is only one situation where the primary source rule (for convenience, summed up as 'first printed source wins') doesn't hold, and that is when a book explicitly states that it supercedes whatever came before it, like the Spell Compendium and Magic Item Compendium do for the entries that are reprinted in them. If that text making it an official update isn't there, a book can say whatever the heck it likes- the only way to change the actual primary rule is to issue errata to the primary source.

Godskook
2010-05-24, 06:28 PM
I would think CW would "win" because it was published sooner.

Nope. The only way to make changes to a 'primary source' is with errata.

Anxe
2010-05-24, 06:28 PM
Sooner to now. Sorry. Slang/dialect language difference.

And yes, they are suggestions, but then aren't all the rules just suggestions?

Temotei
2010-05-24, 06:32 PM
Sooner to now. Sorry. Slang/dialect language difference.

And yes, they are suggestions, but then aren't all the rules just suggestions?

Whoa. What dialect is that?

Eh. They technically are suggestions, but some are just plain more solid, like the classes. You could do away with them and have a fighter/wizard that doesn't have a class and can cast any spell they want whenever they want as many times per day as they want and hit anything they want...etc. but that wouldn't be too great, would it?

Boci
2010-05-24, 06:34 PM
Sooner to now. Sorry. Slang/dialect language difference.

And yes, they are suggestions, but then aren't all the rules just suggestions?

Not unless it is specifically stated that "This version of XY updates and replaces all pre existing versions". If it doesn't say that, core it right by default, with the 1 exception of the errata, I think.

Anxe
2010-05-24, 06:39 PM
Okay. And the errata doesn't say anything about psicrystals. And I already said/agreed/admitted they get feats, so I guess I'm gonna leave this thread with my tail between my legs.

And the dialect would be Silicon Valley, California. I never knew that other people didn't use sooner that way, but since ya'll don't it must be my dialect/slang.

nedz
2010-05-24, 07:37 PM
I've a side question to this.

Given
1) Psi Crystals get feats as normal (dependant upon HD)
2) Psi Crystals get Alertness as their first feat
3) Psi Crystals don't benefit from this feat, instead their owners do.
Who benefits from their later feats ?

So basically: Does having a Psi Crystal double your feats ?

This must be wrong.

Jarian
2010-05-24, 07:39 PM
I've a side question to this.

Given
1) Psi Crystals get feats as normal (dependant upon HD)
2) Psi Crystals get Alertness as their first feat
3) Psi Crystals don't benefit from this feat, instead their owners do.
Who benefits from their later feats ?

So basically: Does having a Psi Crystal double your feats ?

This must be wrong.

That's absolutely wrong. The (Ex) ability of the Psicrystal, Alertness, is the only indication of the sharing of feats. And it's not even sharing, really.

There's nothing to indicate that anyone except the Psicrystal would benefit from its own feats.

Yuki Akuma
2010-05-24, 07:42 PM
I've a side question to this.

Given
1) Psi Crystals get feats as normal (dependant upon HD)
2) Psi Crystals get Alertness as their first feat
3) Psi Crystals don't benefit from this feat, instead their owners do.
Who benefits from their later feats ?

So basically: Does having a Psi Crystal double your feats ?

This must be wrong.

What?

Psicrystals have the Alertness feat.

Psicrystals grant the Alertness ability, which grants their master the benefit of the Alertness feat when they're within 5 feet.

There is nothing about them not benefiting from their feats. Of course they do. They're their feats.

(But yes, they do double your feats, because Feat Leech (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/featLeech.htm).)

Anxe
2010-05-24, 07:45 PM
Would the DM pick their feats or the player?

nedz
2010-05-24, 07:47 PM
What?

Psicrystals have the Alertness feat.

Psicrystals grant the Alertness ability, which grants their master the benefit of the Alertness feat when they're within 5 feet.

There is nothing about them not benefiting from their feats. Of course they do. They're their feats.

I'm glad I was wrong


(But yes, they do double your feats, because Feat Leech (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/featLeech.htm).)

On the other hand, ...

nedz
2010-05-24, 07:49 PM
Would the DM pick their feats or the player?

The DM would house rule this out I suspect, but in case of insanity the Player would choose.

tyckspoon
2010-05-24, 07:52 PM
Would the DM pick their feats or the player?

Rules are silent on the matter, but it's generally considered good form to let the player make decisions regarding the effects of their own class features/feats. Especially the ones that are meant to be adjuncts to the character (familiar/companion/mount style) instead of independent characters in their own rights who work with the character for their own reasons (Leadership Cohorts, mostly.)

Fluff-wise, a psionic character has perhaps the best argument for selecting the Psicrystal's feats himself. It's literally a piece of his own mind.

Gralamin
2010-05-24, 08:07 PM
There is a valid argument, that I do not agree with, that psicrystals don't get feats. I will mention it for completeness sake.


Normally all that's required to obtain feats is to have both an Intelligence score (which psicrystals do) and hit dice (which they sort of do). However, the entry for the psicrystal (Expanded Psionics Handbook, pages 207-208) does not include rules for Advancement; instead, it says:

A psicrystal’s characteristics depend on its master. Its Hit Dice are equal to its master’s Hit Dice (counting only levels in psion or wilder), its hit points are equal to half its master’s, and its saving throw bonuses are the same as its master’s.

This can be read to mean the only thing that changes are the hit points and saving throw bonuses, since Psicrystals do not technically advance.

It is not an argument I agree with, but it is very difficult to disprove it with RAW.

NEO|Phyte
2010-05-24, 08:16 PM
There is a valid argument, that I do not agree with, that psicrystals don't get feats. I will mention it for completeness sake.



This can be read to mean the only thing that changes are the hit points and saving throw bonuses, since Psicrystals do not technically advance.

It is not an argument I agree with, but it is very difficult to disprove it with RAW.
Given that HP and Saves are usually tied to HD, could be they're listed so as to be exceptions to the usual rule(s).

Draz74
2010-05-24, 09:15 PM
And the dialect would be Silicon Valley, California. I never knew that other people didn't use sooner that way, but since ya'll don't it must be my dialect/slang.

:smallconfused: I'm likewise a Silicon Valley native, and I'm not familiar with using "sooner" to mean "more recently."

...

To chime in on-topic, I also believe that, RAI, Psicrystals were not intended to receive Feats. (I think the writers probably forgot that Constructs, if not mindless, can actually have feats by the rules.) I am intrigued to hear that such a possibility genuinely hadn't occurred to some readers. I would probably not allow Psicrystal Feats as a DM, but RAW it's clear they get them.


They do not have some sort of 'special hit dice' that only advance some things and not others. The entry says nothing about what their hit dice advance. Ergo, they are normal hit dice in every way.

The following passages, overriding the normal rules for some things that are usually Hit Dice-based, would seem to counter this statement:


Saving Throws

A psicrystal uses its owner’s base saving throw bonuses and ability modifiers on saves ...

[snip]

Skills

A psicrystal has the same skill ranks as its owner, except that it has a minimum of 4 ranks each in Spot, Listen, Move Silently, and Search. (Even if its owner has no ranks in these skills, a psicrystal has 4 ranks in each.)

[snip]

its hit points are equal to half its master’s

Zeful
2010-05-25, 12:19 AM
The primary source is wherever it appeared first. In the case of rule books, it's the actual book.

No it's not. It's a case of focus. For example: In regard to magic item creation rules the Magic Item Compendium supersedes all other sources when in play.

As for the issue at hand: I can't find any mention of Hit Die advancement for Psycrystals anywhere on the SRD. In fact the Terms HD or Hit Die (or Dice) is only used for the reference to the Psion's and appear nowhere else on the page.
Relevant section spoilered (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/classes/psion.htm#psicrystals)
Psicrystals

A psicrystal is a fragment of a psionic character’s personality, brought into physical form and a semblance of life (via the Psicrystal Affinity feat). A psicrystal appears as a crystalline construct about the size of a human hand.

Because it is an extension of its creator’s personality, a character’s psicrystal is in some ways a part of him. That’s why, for example, a psionic character can manifest a personal range power on his psicrystal even though normally he can manifest such a power only on himself.

A psicrystal is treated as a construct for the purposes of all effects that depend on its type.

A psicrystal grants special abilities to its owner, as shown on the Psicrystal Special Abilities table below. In addition, a psicrystal has a personality (being a fragment of the owner’s personality), which gives its owner a bonus on certain types of checks or saving throws, as given on the Psicrystal Personalities table below. These special abilities and bonuses apply only when the owner and the psicrystal are within 1 mile of each other.

Psicrystal abilities are based on the owner’s levels in psionic classes. Levels from other classes do not count toward the owner’s level for purposes of psicrystal abilities.

A psicrystal can speak one language of its owner’s choice (so long as it is a language the owner knows). A psicrystal can understand all other languages known by its owner, but cannot speak them. This is a supernatural ability.

Psicrystal Basics

Use the statistics for a psicrystal, but make the following changes.
Saving Throws

A psicrystal uses its owner’s base saving throw bonuses and ability modifiers on saves, though it doesn’t enjoy any other bonuses its owner might have (from magic items or feats, for example).
Abilities

When its self-propulsion ability is not activated, a psicrystal has no Strength score and no Dexterity score.
Skills

A psicrystal has the same skill ranks as its owner, except that it has a minimum of 4 ranks each in Spot, Listen, Move Silently, and Search. (Even if its owner has no ranks in these skills, a psicrystal has 4 ranks in each.) A psicrystal uses its own ability modifiers on skill checks.

Psicrystal Ability Descriptions

All psicrystals have special abilities (or impart abilities to their owners) depending on the level of the owner, as shown on the table above. The abilities on the table are cumulative.
Natural Armor Adj. (Ex)

This number noted here is an improvement to the psicrystal’s natural armor bonus (normally 0). It represents a psicrystal’s preternatural durability.
Intelligence Adj. (Ex)

Add this value to the psicrystal’s Intelligence score. Psicrystals are as smart as people (though not necessarily as smart as smart people).
Alertness (Ex)

The presence of a psicrystal sharpens its master’s senses. While a psicrystal is within arm’s reach (adjacent to or in the same square as its owner), its owner gains the Alertness feat.
Improved Evasion (Ex)

If a psicrystal is subjected to an attack that normally allows a Reflex saving throw for half damage, it takes no damage if it makes a successful saving throw and half damage even if the saving throw fails.
Personality (Ex)

Every psicrystal has a personality. See Psicrystal Personality, below.
Self-Propulsion (Su)

As a standard action, its owner can will a psicrystal to form spidery, ectoplasmic legs that grant the psicrystal a land speed of 30 feet and a climb speed of 20 feet. The legs fade into nothingness after one day (or sooner, if the owner desires).
Share Powers (Su)

At the owner’s option, he can have any power (but not any psi-like ability) he manifests on himself also affect his psicrystal. The psicrystal must be within 5 feet of him at the time of the manifestation to receive the benefit. If the power has a duration other than instantaneous, it stops affecting the psicrystal if it moves farther than 5 feet away, and will not affect the psicrystal again, even if it returns to its owner before the duration expires.

Additionally, the owner can manifest a power with a target of “You” on his psicrystal (as a touch range power) instead of on himself. The owner and psicrystal cannot share powers if the powers normally do not affect creatures of the psicrystal’s type (construct).
Sighted (Ex)

Although it has no physical sensory organs, a psicrystal can telepathically sense its environment as well as a creature with normal vision and hearing. Darkness (even supernatural darkness) is irrelevant, as are areas of supernatural silence, though a psicrystal still can’t discern invisible or ethereal beings. A psicrystal’s sighted range is 40 feet.
Telepathic Link (Su)

The owner has a telepathic link with his psicrystal out to a distance of up to 1 mile. The owner cannot see through the psicrystal’s senses, but the two of them can communicate telepathically as if the psicrystal were the target of a mindlink power manifested by the owner. For instance, a psicrystal placed in a distant room could relay the activities occurring in that room.

Because of the telepathic link between a psicrystal and its owner, the owner has the same connection to an item or place that the psicrystal does. For instance, if his psicrystal has seen a room, the owner can teleport into that room as if he has seen it too.
Deliver Touch Powers (Su)

If the owner is 3rd level or higher, his psicrystal can deliver touch powers for him. If the owner and psicrystal are in contact at the time the owner manifests a touch power, he can designate his psicrystal as the “toucher.” The psicrystal can then deliver the touch power just as the owner could. As usual, if the owner manifests another power before the touch is delivered, the touch power dissipates.
Telepathic Speech (Ex)

If the owner is 5th level or higher, the psicrystal can communicate telepathically with any creature that has a language and is within 30 feet of the psicrystal, while the psicrystal is also within 1 mile of the owner.
Flight (Su)

If the owner is 9th level or higher, he can, as a standard action, will his psicrystal to fly at a speed of 50 feet (poor). The psicrystal drifts gently to the ground after one day (or sooner, if the owner desires).
Power Resistance (Ex)

If the owner is 11th level or higher, the psicrystal gains power resistance equal to the owner’s level + 5. To affect the psicrystal with a power, another manifester must get a result on a manifester level check that equals or exceeds the psicrystal’s power resistance.
Sight Link (Sp)

If the owner is 13th level or higher, the character can remote view the psicrystal (as if manifesting the remote view power) once per day.
Channel Power (Sp)

If the owner is 15th level or higher, he can manifest powers through the psicrystal to a distance of up to 1 mile. The psicrystal is treated as the power’s originator, and all ranges are calculated from its location.

When channeling a power through his psicrystal, the owner manifests the power by paying its power point cost. He is still subject to attacks of opportunity and other hazards of manifesting a power, if applicable (for instance, he becomes visible when manifesting an offensive power if invisible, as does the psicrystal).
Psicrystal Personality (Ex)

Each psicrystal has a distinct personality, chosen by its owner at the time of its creation from among those given on the following table. At 1st level, its owner typically gets a feel for a psicrystal’s personality only through occasional impulses, but as the owner increases in level the psicrystal’s personality becomes more pronounced. At higher levels, it is not uncommon for a psicrystal to constantly ply its owner with observations and advice, often severely slanted toward the psicrystal’s particular worldview. The owner always sees a bit of himself in his psicrystal, even if magnified and therefore distorted.

So I'm going to have to say: Psicrystals do not gain feats.

DragoonWraith
2010-05-25, 12:28 AM
Psicrystal Basics
Use the statistics for a psicrystal, but make the following changes.

As you noted, nothing in the Psion's section on Psicrystals states that anything about their HD should be changed, so you should use their stats found in the monster entry, as I've provided:

Psicrystal (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/monsters/psicrystal.htm)
A psicrystal’s characteristics depend on its master. Its Hit Dice are equal to its master’s Hit Dice(emphasis mine)

Also notable on that page: The example Psicrystal has a feat! And it's not a bonus feat! How'd it get that? Why, because it has 1 HD!

Jarian
2010-05-25, 12:30 AM
Check your copy of XPH. Especially the part that directs you to the statblock, which states:
Hit Dice: As master’s HD (hp 1/2 master’s)

Edit: Curse you, DragoonWraith! I didn't stay up this late just to be ninja'd! *fistshake*

And ninja'd with better information, too. :smallfrown:

Lycanthromancer
2010-05-25, 12:38 AM
As you noted, nothing in the Psion's section on Psicrystals states that anything about their HD should be changed, so you should use their stats found in the monster entry, as I've provided:

Psicrystal (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/monsters/psicrystal.htm)(emphasis mine)

Also notable on that page: The example Psicrystal has a feat! And it's not a bonus feat! How'd it get that? Why, because it has 1 HD!Yeah, it's only something we've been linking to throughout the entirety of the thread.

Jarian
2010-05-25, 12:40 AM
Yeah, it's only something we've been linking to throughout the entirety of the thread.

It's like you think details matter to people who want to be right.

Lycanthromancer
2010-05-25, 12:41 AM
It's like you think details matter to people who want to be right.People who want to be right should make an effort to, y'know, be right. Otherwise it's a waste of time.

Jarian
2010-05-25, 12:43 AM
People who want to be right should make an effort to, y'know, be right. Otherwise it's a waste of time.

More of your annoying little details. I handwave you away, litttle man! Handwave, handwave!

...Okay, I'll stop mocking people that were wrong now. I'll be good. :smallfrown:

Lycanthromancer
2010-05-25, 12:45 AM
More of your annoying little details. I handwave you away, little man! Handwave, handwave!

...Okay, I'll stop mocking people that were wrong now. I'll be good. :smallfrown:I think I love you. And that's something, considering my sig, and your gender.

Godskook
2010-05-25, 12:52 AM
I think I love you. And that's something, considering my sig, and your gender.

Nah, there's no such thing as girls on the internets, so you're good.

Jarian
2010-05-25, 12:59 AM
Nah, there's no such thing as girls on the internets, so you're good.

I am, in reality, a fifty year old man living in my mother's basement.

As is every other female on the internet.

Don't be fooled by our crafty attempts to convince you otherwise.

Hendel
2010-05-25, 01:46 AM
Folks, I think this can best be summed up as this. According to a strict reading of the rules, everyone who believes psicyrstals gain HD ergo they gain feats is correct. Whether or not that was the intention, one could only probe the minds of the game creators to find out for sure. If they were supposed to be more like familiars, then maybe that should have been stated more clearly.

Like most laws and rules, there is one group who makes them and another group who interprets them. All laws and rules are subject to interpretation, and possibly misinterpretation, by every individual who reads them. That is why absolutes are sometimes hard to come by in games and the real world. This subjectivism causes us to see everything through the eyes that we have gained through our experiences and it can be biased based upon the outcome we desire.

In short, if you do not believe that was the intention of the rules concerning psicrystals, then interpret it that way, do not allow feats for psicrystals and move on, you are not wrong. Otherwise, use them and be happy, because those folks are not wrong either. Of course this opens up the realm of the idea that the caster can then access the psicrystal's feats some how as a "feat well." Once more interpretation is required and the debate will rage on...

BobVosh
2010-05-25, 03:25 AM
I am, in reality, a fifty year old man living in my mother's basement.

As is every other female on the internet.

Don't be fooled by our crafty attempts to convince you otherwise.

wait...they are all in your mom's basement? How big is this basement? How rich are your parents?

2xMachina
2010-05-25, 04:37 AM
Magic =/= Psionic.

Remember that. Totally different. :smallwink:

Yuki Akuma
2010-05-25, 05:26 AM
-snip-

Yes yes, if you think it's unbalanced house rule it, we know.

Seriously, there's always someone who thinks this is some huge revelation...

Blackfang108
2010-05-25, 09:58 AM
wait...they are all in your mom's basement? How big is this basement? How rich are your parents?

And do they have more room? What's rent like?

Zen Master
2010-05-25, 11:02 AM
This is my honest view:

Everyone who argues that psicrystals gain feats, do so because they want psycrystals to have feats. You arrive at that conclusion, then go look for the evidence to support it.

Psicrystals don't gain feats because there really is really no good reason why they should. The guys who make the rules made the error of not pointing this out specifically - and this should surprise no one, because they do seem to mess up about as often as they get it right. They are a minor add-on - exactly like the familier.

They are not meant to be a major power aspect of the class. But because you want it to be, and the rules don't specifically state that it isn't, no one is ever going to convince you otherwise.

Of course, the reverse goes for me. I too wouldn't ever need to check the rules to find out that they don't gain feats, except the question popped up on this forum.

See my sig.

Scipio
2010-05-25, 11:09 AM
This is my honest view:

Everyone who argues that psicrystals gain feats, do so because they want psycrystals to have feats. You arrive at that conclusion, then go look for the evidence to support it.

Psicrystals don't gain feats because there really is really no good reason why they should. The guys who make the rules made the error of not pointing this out specifically - and this should surprise no one, because they do seem to mess up about as often as they get it right. They are a minor add-on - exactly like the familier.

They are not meant to be a major power aspect of the class. But because you want it to be, and the rules don't specifically state that it isn't, no one is ever going to convince you otherwise.

Of course, the reverse goes for me. I too wouldn't ever need to check the rules to find out that they don't gain feats, except the question popped up on this forum.

See my sig.

QFT

There is not much point in trying to convincing people that psicrystals do not gain feats. Common sense appears to play little part in the argument supporting that position.

Frog Dragon
2010-05-25, 11:12 AM
However, common sense has nothing to do with rules discussions. It's either RAW or it's not. The RAW seems to support psicrystals having feats. (for evidence, see other posters in this thread.) Common sense doesn't enter it. It's all just trying to decipher the wording.

Hendel
2010-05-25, 11:15 AM
Yes yes, if you think it's unbalanced house rule it, we know.

Seriously, there's always someone who thinks this is some huge revelation...

No, I do not think of it as some huge revelation, just a colossal waste of time to argue the point ad infinitum, but this is a forum and one of it's many uses is to allow people to argue relatively small and inconsequential points until they are blue in the face. Proceed...

kamikasei
2010-05-25, 11:15 AM
Everyone who argues that psicrystals gain feats, do so because they want psycrystals to have feats. You arrive at that conclusion, then go look for the evidence to support it.
...
But because you want it to be, and the rules don't specifically state that it isn't, no one is ever going to convince you otherwise.

There is not much point in trying to convincing people that psicrystals do not gain feats. Common sense appears to play little part in the argument supporting that position.
That's a pretty insulting thing to say. Isn't it possible that your arguments just aren't convincing? Relying on the assumption that your position is "common sense" and those who disagree are being wilfully obtuse is not a recipe for sound reasoning.

It's not exactly uncommon to recognize that Wizards wanted the rules to do one thing but wrote them so that they do another. This recognition by no means requires you to want things to work that other way.

DragoonWraith
2010-05-25, 11:23 AM
Everyone who argues that psicrystals gain feats, do so because they want psycrystals to have feats. You arrive at that conclusion, then go look for the evidence to support it.
Which they find, in abundance...


Psicrystals don't gain feats because there really is really no good reason why they should.
Excepting the fact that every relevant rule printed says that they do, and they have a feat in their stat block just like you'd expect them to have.


The guys who make the rules made the error of not pointing this out specifically - and this should surprise no one, because they do seem to mess up about as often as they get it right. They are a minor add-on - exactly like the familier.
There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that they were ever intended to be exactly like the familiar. This is you wanting something to be true and reading between the lines and squinting real hard and pretending there are rules that read the way you want them to read. There are not.


They are not meant to be a major power aspect of the class. But because you want it to be, and the rules don't specifically state that it isn't, no one is ever going to convince you otherwise.
Or... because they have a feat? And because the rules are pretty damn clear? The game isn't balanced, there is absolutely no way you can claim "my interpretation, despite its divergence from the actual rules, must be right, because it would be better balanced." - because the actual rules rarely are. Hell, the fact that it's imbalanced might be a point in favor of them getting feats - because it certainly seems more in keeping with the rest of the material that 3.5 offered.

You feel that Psicrystals are imbalanced if they gain feats. You are probably right. Therefore, houserule them that way. I've never understood why people feel the need to prove that the way they like things is RAW when it isn't, as if there was something wrong with a houserule.


Of course, the reverse goes for me. I too wouldn't ever need to check the rules to find out that they don't gain feats, except the question popped up on this forum.
Of course - but in this case, when the people who always took it for granted that they got feats (as many in this thread have), and the people who took it for granted that they do not (as many in this thread have), you check the rules - and they quite clearly state (though not explicitly, but there is no reason this should be necessary) that Psicrystals gain feats.

You can then argue that this is imbalanced. Considering Feat Leech, I don't think many would disagree with you. So you houserule it, and all is well. But that doesn't make it RAW.

Scipio
2010-05-25, 11:45 AM
If I understand the argument correctly (not attempting to create a straw man), the consensus among the "psicrystals get feats" crowd is this:

Psicrystals have actual HD equal to the master as opposed to the effective HD line with familiars. Monsters gain feats when they are advanced by HD. Therefore psicrystals get feats.

My Position
When a monster is advanced they gain: HP, HD, Saves, Skills, Feats and Ability Points.

Should psicrystals be treated like a regular creature when it comes to advancement? The rules are clear that they do not advance normally in regards to HP, Saves and Skills. The psicrystal's advancement is tied to the master, and the rules clearly state what changes when the master's level changes. Using the stat block as a basis for the argument is fundamentally flawed, when all aspects of advancement are spelled out. If you are going to use the stat block as the basis for the argument, you should take a look at the advancement line for psicrystals.


Advancement: -

How can you claim it is RAW, when there is no reference to feat advancement for psicrystals? Is it written? No. Do you default to creature advancement? Why would you since the psicrystal advancement clearly falls under a different set of guidelines?

kamikasei
2010-05-25, 11:56 AM
Monsters don't simply gain feats when advanced by HD. They have feats according to their HD before any advancement. Psicrystals have HD. Their saves and hit points follow special rules spelled out in their monster entry. No specific rule is stated for how they handle feats which would overrule the general rule that feats depend on hit dice.

Draz74
2010-05-25, 12:06 PM
"Advancement: -" is indeed evidence that the Rules As Intended didn't include feats for Psicrystals, though. (Not indisputable evidence, and it certainly doesn't change the RAW, by which Psicrystals still gain feats. But evidence nonetheless.)

Yuki Akuma
2010-05-25, 12:12 PM
Everyone who argues that psicrystals gain feats, do so because they want psycrystals to have feats. You arrive at that conclusion, then go look for the evidence to support it.

-snip-

See my sig.

Hahah, no. No, I don't want to use this in an actual game - I never have and I never will. Spellcasters are powerful enough as it is without twice the feats.

See my sig.


How can you claim it is RAW, when there is no reference to feat advancement for psicrystals? Is it written? No. Do you default to creature advancement? Why would you since the psicrystal advancement clearly falls under a different set of guidelines?

Because those guidelines say nothing about feats. But they do mention HD. Feats are a function of HD, not advancement in general.

A monster born with 6 HD has three feats. A monster that reaches 6 HD through advancement also has three feats. A monster that eats souls and gains HD up to 6 HD also has three feats.

There is nothing wrong with house rules. Why must you flail around searching for justifications for yours? Can't you just accept that they're house rules?

Stegyre
2010-05-25, 12:26 PM
This is my honest view:

Everyone who argues that psicrystals gain feats, do so because they want psycrystals to have feats. You arrive at that conclusion, then go look for the evidence to support it.
Golly gee!

I don't want psicrystals to have feats. I think it's stupid and clearly subject to abuse.

But the other side of the argument is so much better supported and so clearly RAW, that it isn't even a close question: default rules apply, unless an exception is specifically called out; the default rule, not just for "monsters," but for virtually everything with HD (exceptions being specifically called out), is feats equal to 1/3 HD +1 (for the first-level feat).

The psicrystal makes numerous exceptions for HP, for saves, for skills. Those exceptions trump the default rules in those areas. The psicrystal makes no exception for feat acquisition. That's why the default rule applies. Express exceptions in one area do not imply exceptions in another. Usual rules of interpretation are just the opposite. ("They clearly know how to write an exception, so if they didn't write one, they did not intend one.")

One does not need to justify application of the default rule; one must justify abrogating the default rule. Opponents of psicrystal feats fail to do so.

Scipio
2010-05-25, 12:48 PM
There is nothing wrong with house rules. Why must you flail around searching for justifications for yours? Can't you just accept that they're house rules?

I wouldn't call anything I have stated thus far flailing around. I have simply read the rules governing psicrystals, applied a bit of reasonable logic to the RAW, and I cannot see anything to suggest that my position is incorrect.

As pointed out by Frog Dragon:

However, common sense has nothing to do with rules discussions.

If a logical and common sense approach to rules interpretation is out of bounds, then why discuss the application of rules?

I guess I am looking at things from a balance perspective, and the discussion has been solely about what is written in the rules. I am fine with that, and I have enjoyed the discussion. Thanks guys.

Blackfang108
2010-05-25, 01:04 PM
I guess I am looking at things from a balance perspective,

There's your problem.

If we were arguing 4e, Balance is a valid consideration in RAW discussions.

This is 3.5. Balance doesn't exist, nor should it enter into RAW discussion.

:D

Optimystik
2010-05-25, 01:28 PM
I wouldn't call anything I have stated thus far flailing around. I have simply read the rules governing psicrystals, applied a bit of reasonable logic to the RAW, and I cannot see anything to suggest that my position is incorrect.

To summarize:
Your position is incorrect from a RAW perspective.
Your position is fine from an RAMS perspective.
We don't know the RAI perspective.

DragoonWraith
2010-05-25, 02:33 PM
"Advancement: -" is indeed evidence that the Rules As Intended didn't include feats for Psicrystals, though. (Not indisputable evidence, and it certainly doesn't change the RAW, by which Psicrystals still gain feats. But evidence nonetheless.)
No, it's really not. It's evidence that Psicrystals are never meant to be out adventuring separated from their masters and gaining experience and HD. It's evidence that there is no way for a Psicrystal to gain HD other than through its master gaining a level of Psion or Wilder, as it has no natural advancement of its own. It is evidence of absolutely nothing about feats on its own, RAI or RAW.


I guess I am looking at things from a balance perspective, and the discussion has been solely about what is written in the rules. I am fine with that, and I have enjoyed the discussion. Thanks guys.
Correct:

The game isn't balanced, there is absolutely no way you can claim "my interpretation, despite its divergence from the actual rules, must be right, because it would be better balanced." - because the actual rules rarely are. Hell, the fact that it's imbalanced might be a point in favor of them getting feats - because it certainly seems more in keeping with the rest of the material that 3.5 offered.

You feel that Psicrystals are imbalanced if they gain feats. You are probably right. Therefore, houserule them that way. I've never understood why people feel the need to prove that the way they like things is RAW when it isn't, as if there was something wrong with a houserule.
We are talking about what the rules actually are. Not how they make the most sense, or what maybe the designer intended to say, or what would be best balanced, purely what the rules themselves actually say.

This is important because we play games together, and when I play a Psion, I expect either my Psicrystal to get feats, or the DM to tell me ahead of time that Psicrystals don't get feats as a houserule. It's a perfectly reasonable houserule. It wouldn't stop me from playing a Psion. But nonetheless it's something I need to be aware of as a player, and the DM needs to be aware of as a DM.

PlzBreakMyCmpAn
2010-05-25, 06:04 PM
This is the difference:

Basically, the familiar is "treated as" having HD equal to the master's class level, whereas the psicrystal actually gets those HD (and all the benefits thereof).you know the funny thing is the "treated as" string isn't in the quote you provided. If feats are an 'effect related to number of Hit Dice' then familiars would seem to get them. These are not the quotes you are looking for *jedi hand wave*


And how pray do you know what the spirit is?lol. This question is not literally asking for disambiguations of multiple interpretations. Which is ironic considering I'm pretty sure that you were trying to get him to saw the RAW is more important that the RAI. But hey, I can't know what you were trying to say, right? That would be the 'spirit' of your text... :smallbiggrin:

kamikasei
2010-05-25, 06:09 PM
If feats are an 'effect related to number of Hit Dice' then familiars would seem to get them.

They're not.

Runestar
2010-05-25, 06:28 PM
Is everyone so opposed to having your psicrystal take martial study/stance for white raven tactics and aura-based stances? :smalleek:

Now, I guess I will have to pester the wizard to buff it with heroics ever so often. :smalltongue:

I would allow psicrystals to take feats, because it seems like such a fun thing to do.

Anarril
2010-05-25, 10:02 PM
They're not.

Yes (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/improvingMonsters.htm#featAcquisitionandAbilitySco reIncreases) they are (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/improvingMonsters.htm#increasingHitDice). (EDIT: Sorry, misread the post kamikasei replied to as relating to the psicrystal HD-feat connection. Please ignore these qoutes :smallredface:)


A monster’s total Hit Dice, not its ECL, govern its acquisition of feats.


As its Hit Dice increase, a creature’s attack bonuses and saving throw modifiers might improve. It gains more feats...


1. All types have a number of feats equal to 1 + 1 per 3 Hit Dice.
All emphasis's (sp?) mine.

Now that is out of the way, my thoughts on the matter.
RAW: they gain feats
RAI: we don't know
Balance: they (probably) should not gain feats
Houserule: whatever you want

Please understand that discussions such as these should (at least at first) always focus as much as is possible on RAW, not on balance or RAI or common sense or realism or coolness or ease of use or what you think it should be. RAW is the only baseline we have in getting a common understanding about how d&d works. After you have established what the RAW is you can talk about those other variants in the understanding that they deviate from the default, ie what you should expect most people to use. Because when you show up with your pimped out psicrystal and the DM wants the feats removed, at least you can point to the rules and say: "sure, but I was not trying to trick you or anything". And that breeds trust. So, basically what DragoonWraith was saying :smallwink:.

Godskook
2010-05-25, 10:05 PM
you know the funny thing is the "treated as" string isn't in the quote you provided. If feats are an 'effect related to number of Hit Dice' then familiars would seem to get them. These are not the quotes you are looking for *jedi hand wave*

Feats are not 'effects'.

Yuki Akuma
2010-05-25, 10:08 PM
Feats are not 'effects'.

In fact, feats have effects. And effects don't have effects. >.>

(Of course the acquisition of a feat can be an effect.)

Optimystik
2010-05-25, 10:10 PM
Yes (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/improvingMonsters.htm#featAcquisitionandAbilitySco reIncreases) they are (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/improvingMonsters.htm#increasingHitDice).

I think kamikasei was saying "they're not effects" not "familiars DO get them."

Anarril
2010-05-25, 10:13 PM
I think kamikasei was saying "they're not effects" not "familiars DO get them."
Yeah, I misread that. I'll edit my post to point out my mistake.

The Glyphstone
2010-05-25, 10:20 PM
Is everyone so opposed to having your psicrystal take martial study/stance for white raven tactics and aura-based stances? :smalleek:

Now, I guess I will have to pester the wizard to buff it with heroics ever so often. :smalltongue:

I would allow psicrystals to take feats, because it seems like such a fun thing to do.

This is an awesome idea. :)

kamikasei
2010-05-26, 02:49 AM
I think kamikasei was saying "they're not effects" not "familiars DO get them."

Brevity backfired.

Bogardan_Mage
2010-05-26, 04:44 AM
If a logical and common sense approach to rules interpretation is out of bounds, then why discuss the application of rules?
As far as I can tell neither you nor anyone else arguing for no feats for psicrystals has explained why their approach is so much more logical or their conclusion is the "common sense" solution, they've just asserted that it is so and used that as justification (or they've avoided the issue entirely by not going into value judgments about rules interpretation). "There's no reason to think they have feats" is not only not logical or common sense, it's not even factually true (as has been pointed out already). Your argument about the advancement entry has similarly been refuted. If you have a genuinely common sense approach to put forward, do so! Frog Dragon doesn't speak for all of us.

lord_khaine
2010-05-26, 05:06 AM
I do belive i once saw a post by Bruce Cordel, where he said that though Psycrystals wasnt suposed to gain feats, then he couldnt find anything in the rules that would prevent them from doing so.

Zen Master
2010-05-26, 05:31 AM
you check the rules

No. No I don't. The rules are riddled with mistakes. And on top of that, they were poorly written and shoddily playtested - even if they were perfectly free of mistakes, I'd never take them as the final word on how to play the game.

Luckily though, this is all academic to me. No one in my group has ever tried to get the 'psicrystals have feats' madness past me - or any of the others, when they GM.

Maybe I should try. Could be fun to hear their outrage.

Zen Master
2010-05-26, 05:35 AM
But the other side of the argument is so much better supported and so clearly RAW, that it isn't even a close question: default rules apply, unless an exception is specifically called out;

The fact that they clearly forgot to call out the exception does not in any way obligate or force me to play by their mistakes. That's all I'm saying.

Amateurish game design must not automatically lead to silly game play. And as you said: Casters really, honestly don't need it, so why argue?

Yuki Akuma
2010-05-26, 05:38 AM
The fact that they clearly forgot to call out the exception does not in any way obligate or force me to play by their mistakes. That's all I'm saying.

No, it doesn't.

You're free to house rule it however you like.

This does not give you the right to claim your house rules are in any way better than the RAW, or are actually the RAW themselves.

kamikasei
2010-05-26, 06:14 AM
No. No I don't. The rules are riddled with mistakes. And on top of that, they were poorly written and shoddily playtested - even if they were perfectly free of mistakes, I'd never take them as the final word on how to play the game.

It's pretty bloody rude to accuse others of picking their conclusions first and then going looking for evidence to support them, and then turn around and say you pick your conclusions and ignore the evidence entirely.

Zen Master
2010-05-26, 08:08 AM
It's pretty bloody rude to accuse others of picking their conclusions first and then going looking for evidence to support them, and then turn around and say you pick your conclusions and ignore the evidence entirely.

I'm sorry, but I disagree. I comment on what I observe, while keeping a clear view of the fact that I'm no different myself.

What, exactly, are you objecting to?

Zen Master
2010-05-26, 08:10 AM
This does not give you the right to claim your house rules are in any way better than the RAW, or are actually the RAW themselves.

I haven't mentioned RAW at all. Nor have I claimed the way I play is better.

Care to read what I've actually said, and then comment on that?

Flickerdart
2010-05-26, 08:12 AM
So essentially you're saying "it's in the rules, but screw the rules". How is that different from a house rule?

Ferrin
2010-05-26, 08:18 AM
Now in a less hostile tone...

People who say Psi-crystals gain feats by RAW are right, by RAW.

People who say Psi-crystals do not gain feats are wrong, by RAW.


What I think:
People who say Psi-crystals do not gain feats neglect the rules in favor of there own conclusions due to there misinterpretation of the rules.

Whether it's balanced or not is not the point, the discussion is about the RAW.

Optimystik
2010-05-26, 08:24 AM
I think what Acromos is saying is that this was a gaffe of such magnitude on WotC's part that it doesn't even deserve to be formally codified as a houserule - such as monks not being proficient in unarmed strikes.

But it doesn't make sense for us to get into the whole "Well, my table would allow it." "Well, mine would die first!" game.

That doesn't change the fact that it is a houserule, but it seems that not everyone likes the term.

Scipio
2010-05-26, 09:34 AM
As far as I can tell neither you nor anyone else arguing for no feats for psicrystals has explained why their approach is so much more logical or their conclusion is the "common sense" solution, they've just asserted that it is so and used that as justification (or they've avoided the issue entirely by not going into value judgments about rules interpretation). "There's no reason to think they have feats" is not only not logical or common sense, it's not even factually true (as has been pointed out already). Your argument about the advancement entry has similarly been refuted. If you have a genuinely common sense approach to put forward, do so! Frog Dragon doesn't speak for all of us.

Not sure why I keep biting on these responses, but here I go again.

Here is why I believe it is common sense and logical. The presentation of psicrystals and familiars are very similar. Are they exactly the same? No. For me at least, I believe they are close enough to interpret one based on the other. If A is true, and A equals B, then B is true. We aren't talking about mathematics here. We are discussing the applications of rules that often are not terribly consistent due to the number of writers involved in creating the system (and poor editing). So I would say in D&D rules terms that if A is true, and A is equivalent to B, the B is true. A simple reading of the two entries (familiars and psicrystals) indicates they are pretty much equivalent. Is it open to interpretation? Of course. That is why we are discussing it. If interpreting one rule based on another makes it a house rule, so be it.

2xMachina
2010-05-26, 09:43 AM
Actually, no. Psionic is balanced differently than Magic.

Psionic: PP
Magic: Spell slots

Psionic: More balanced powers
Magic: Uber kill spells.

Psionic: Psicrystal only.
Magic: Familiar can be any thing. Imp, Pikachu, etc.

Ferrin
2010-05-26, 09:44 AM
Not sure why I keep biting on these responses, but here I go again.

Here is why I believe it is common sense and logical. The presentation of psicrystals and familiars are very similar. Are they exactly the same? No. For me at least, I believe they are close enough to interpret one based on the other. If A is true, and A equals B, then B is true. We aren't talking about mathematics here. We are discussing the applications of rules that often are not terribly consistent due to the number of writers involved in creating the system (and poor editing). So I would say in D&D rules terms that if A is true, and A is equivalent to B, the B is true. A simple reading of the two entries (familiars and psicrystals) indicates they are pretty much equivalent. Is it open to interpretation? Of course. That is why we are discussing it. If interpreting one rule based on another makes it a house rule, so be it.

So you're admitting that by a strict following of the rules Psi-Crystals gain feats? That's what the whole argument was about, the RAW, not whether it's logical compared to previous rulings of similiar abilities. A psicrystal isn't a familiar, a familiar isn't a psi-crystal. They just share a lot of the same qualities, like the sorcerer and wizard.

The Glyphstone
2010-05-26, 10:01 AM
This has got me thinking about a tangential topic, since it's pretty well agreed on at this point that Psicrystals gain feats, RAI or otherwise.

That topic is...what happens if a psicrystal's master dies? There aren't any rules for this governing familiars in 3.5 - apparently, Tome and Blood had a suggested variant rule for 'orphaned' familiars functioning at a reduced 'master level', retaining sentience if it remained at 1st level or higher.

Psicrystals, on the other hand, are conjured completely out of thin air, a splinter of the psion's psyche given semi-independence and physical form. If the psion dies, might the psicrystal stick around as well? Or would it evaporate/dissolve? There are absolutely no rules governing this in either edition that I can find, only some vague homebrews.

Scipio
2010-05-26, 10:02 AM
Honestly, I believe that interpreting any rule apart from logical consistency with other similar rules is inherently flawed. Let me say again, in my opinion a "RAW only" approach to rules is flawed. Is it the proper starting point for a rules discussion? Sure. Is it the end of the discussion? No. Why not? Because no one uses the RAW only approach to the rules.

The opposing viewpoint hinges the entire discussion on psicrystal's gaining hit die. Are you correct according to RAW? Sure.

candycorn
2010-05-26, 10:04 AM
Not sure why I keep biting on these responses, but here I go again.

Here is why I believe it is common sense and logical. The presentation of psicrystals and familiars are very similar. Are they exactly the same? No. For me at least, I believe they are close enough to interpret one based on the other. If A is true, and A equals B, then B is true. We aren't talking about mathematics here. We are discussing the applications of rules that often are not terribly consistent due to the number of writers involved in creating the system (and poor editing). So I would say in D&D rules terms that if A is true, and A is equivalent to B, the B is true. A simple reading of the two entries (familiars and psicrystals) indicates they are pretty much equivalent. Is it open to interpretation? Of course. That is why we are discussing it. If interpreting one rule based on another makes it a house rule, so be it.

So, psicrystals and familiars are like Chicago style pizza and New York style pizza? They're both pizza, but in some ways, one is better. Psicrystals would be like Chicago style, all thick, and gooey, and loaded with meaty toppings. And familiars would be like New York style, all flimsy and floppy and needing to be folded so you don't drop your cheese and pepperoni on the floor.

AstralFire
2010-05-26, 10:08 AM
This has got me thinking about a tangential topic, since it's pretty well agreed on at this point that Psicrystals gain feats, RAI or otherwise.

That topic is...what happens if a psicrystal's master dies? There aren't any rules for this governing familiars in 3.5 - apparently, Tome and Blood had a suggested variant rule for 'orphaned' familiars functioning at a reduced 'master level', retaining sentience if it remained at 1st level or higher.

Psicrystals, on the other hand, are conjured completely out of thin air, a splinter of the psion's psyche given semi-independence and physical form. If the psion dies, might the psicrystal stick around as well? Or would it evaporate/dissolve? There are absolutely no rules governing this in either edition that I can find, only some vague homebrews.

They get used for lightsabers.

kamikasei
2010-05-26, 10:14 AM
What, exactly, are you objecting to?

I'm objecting to the fact that you started out by insulting those who argue the rules say psicrystals gain feats by claiming that this was just what they wanted the rules to say and that they wouldn't allow any evidence to sway them from their desired conclusion.

Now you're saying that you don't care what the rules say at all. So will you be withdrawing your previous inflammatory comments? If you don't think those on the gains-feats side are actually wrong, but just want to attack their motives, that seems like nothing more than flaming to me.

Ferrin
2010-05-26, 10:19 AM
Honestly, I believe that interpreting any rule apart from logical consistency with other similar rules is inherently flawed. Let me say again, in my opinion a "RAW only" approach to rules is flawed. Is it the proper starting point for a rules discussion? Sure. Is it the end of the discussion? No. Why not? Because no one uses the RAW only approach to the rules.

The opposing viewpoint hinges the entire discussion on psicrystal's gaining hit die. Are you correct according to RAW? Sure.

Here's the whole problem, not everyone discusses things on the same level. You discuss the rules on a RAI level, while I discuss it on a RAW level. Both are correct in there own way, but only of you look at it from that viewpoint. I agree with you that it makes sense that Psi-crystals don't gain feats. But it also makes sense that they do, due to the wording.

RAW vs RAI, just something everyone should allways remember, and, when things like this happen, make it clear from what viewpoint you are discussing it.


They get used for lightsabers.

Not all of them, most of them are crushed because of there annoying personalities. I mean, a splinter of personality of the mad psion that just died? Not keeping him arround to lead me to death! :smallamused:

Yuki Akuma
2010-05-26, 10:20 AM
Honestly, I believe that interpreting any rule apart from logical consistency with other similar rules is inherently flawed. Let me say again, in my opinion a "RAW only" approach to rules is flawed. Is it the proper starting point for a rules discussion? Sure. Is it the end of the discussion? No. Why not? Because no one uses the RAW only approach to the rules.

The opposing viewpoint hinges the entire discussion on psicrystal's gaining hit die. Are you correct according to RAW? Sure.

See, these arguments start because some people always seem to insult anyone who dares answer a rules question with what the rules actually say.

This thread started with someone saying they didn't see where the rules suggested this. He was answered quite quickly with exactly where the rules suggest they get feats. Then someone comes in and claims they don't, and everyone who says they do is like a lawyer who only follows the letter of the law and not the spirit.

And it went downhill from there.

DragoonWraith
2010-05-26, 12:02 PM
:headdesk: :headdesk: :headdesk:

We are talking about the actual rules as they are written.

Acromos, your houserules are all well and good - but they are not the rules.

You can't even provide evidence that they were unintentional, that Wizards only accidentally gave them that ability. Evidence would, in fact, indicate that they intended them to get feats.

You can say that that decision was a mistake on Wizards' part (it probably was). You can say that it was the result of shoddy design or lack of playtesting (it probably was). That's fine and no one will argue with you.

But not everyone feels that way, and those are not the rules as written.

You don't have to (in fact, are encouraged not to) play by the rules as written. Houserules are necessary for a sane game. But for the purpose of rules discussions, your talking about houserules as if they were rules only confuses matters and leads to arguments.

2xMachina
2010-05-26, 12:09 PM
I must also say, Psicrystals and Familiars are very different. Yes, not similar. Sure, it's a companion for a class, but that's like saying an Animal Companion is similar to a Familiar.

AstralFire
2010-05-26, 12:14 PM
To tell the truth, I don't even understand the point of arguing out RAW versus not for something so accidentally and casually houseruled. It just seems... overdone, to me. It doesn't matter if it's houseruled or not, it is likely the sort of thing you will have a hard time going up to your DM and successfully arguing against whichever way he decides it.

DragoonWraith
2010-05-26, 12:16 PM
To tell the truth, I don't even understand the point of arguing out RAW versus not for something so accidentally and casually houseruled. It just seems... overdone, to me. It doesn't matter if it's houseruled or not, it is likely the sort of thing you will have a hard time going up to your DM and successfully arguing against whichever way he decides it.
The point is if a DM doesn't say anything one way or the other, I expect my Psicrystal to get feats, and I am correct in that expectation. I would not mind the houserule, but I would need to know about it.

Scipio
2010-05-26, 12:34 PM
I must also say, Psicrystals and Familiars are very different. Yes, not similar. Sure, it's a companion for a class, but that's like saying an Animal Companion is similar to a Familiar.

Let's play fill in the blank, and see if you are right.

A <blank>'s basic stats including HD, HP, Saves, Skills are derived directly from the owner.

A <blank> has a Natural Armor adjustment and Intelligence score based on the level of the owner.

A <blank> has special abilities based on the owner level including alertness, Improved Evasion, share spells/powers, delivery of touch spells/powers, spell/power resistance, and the ability to scry/remote view the <blank> once per day.

A <blank> grants the owner a bonus to a particular skill, saving throw, etc. based on the type chosen.

Yeah, that is not similar at all.

Boci
2010-05-26, 12:36 PM
Let's play fill in the blank, and see if you are right.

A <blank>'s basic stats including HD, HP, Saves, Skills are derived directly from the owner.

A <blank> has a Natural Armor adjustment and Intelligence score based on the level of the owner.

A <blank> has special abilities based on the owner level including alertness, Improved Evasion, share spells/powers, delivery of touch spells/powers, spell/power resistance, and the ability to scry/remote view the <blank> once per day.

A <blank> grants the owner a bonus to a particular skill, saving throw, etc. based on the type chosen.

Yeah, that is not similar at all.

Don't 75% of those statemments apply to an animal companion?

AstralFire
2010-05-26, 12:38 PM
The point is if a DM doesn't say anything one way or the other, I expect my Psicrystal to get feats, and I am correct in that expectation. I would not mind the houserule, but I would need to know about it.

...

You just had four pages of this argument and you'd seriously get antsy with her for not telling you? If it's something you're unsure of, you ask; there are so many little houserules for things like this in D&D, you do not assume.

Yuki Akuma
2010-05-26, 12:46 PM
A <blank>'s basic stats including HD, HP, Saves, Skills are derived directly from the owner.

Familiars don't derive their HD from their owner.

This is the entire point of this thread.

Christ.

Scipio
2010-05-26, 12:47 PM
Don't 75% of those statemments apply to an animal companion?

No. You should read the animal companion entry.

Lycanthromancer
2010-05-26, 12:47 PM
Let's play fill in the blank, and see if you are right.

A <blank>'s basic stats including HD, HP, Saves, Skills are derived directly from the owner.Psicrystal and animal companion only (familiars don't gain HD).


A <blank> has a Natural Armor adjustment and Intelligence score based on the level of the owner.Psicrystal, animal companion, and familiar.


A <blank> has special abilities based on the owner level including alertness, Improved Evasion, share spells/powers, delivery of touch spells/powers, spell/power resistance, and the ability to scry/remote view the <blank> once per day.Nothing gains the ability to share spells and powers, spell AND power resistance, the ability to deliver both touch-based powers AND spells, and the ability to both scry AND remote view 1/day.

However, if OR is your word of choice, animal companions, familiars, and psicrystals. For most of it, anyway.


A <blank> grants the owner a bonus to a particular skill, saving throw, etc. based on the type chosen.That would be familiars; psicrystals can gain multiple bonuses, if the master so chooses.


Yeah, that is not similar at all.Note that animal companions do the same. Psicrystals also gain something between blindsense and blindsight, they gain ectoplasmic legs, they have hardness 8, they can fly supernaturally, have (non-language-based, non-mind-affecting) telepathy, and can channel psionic powers manifested by their masters. They also are immune to poison, critical hits, stunning, nonlethal damage, do not need to sleep, eat, or breathe, can be the target of polymorph-like effects and can be transformed into golems and other constructs, as well as living creatures (and retain flight, pseudo-blindsense, telepathy, and most of their other abilities regardless of form). They can also grant numerous additional bonuses via the Improved Psicrystal feat, grant their owners access to more psionic-focus effects, can be buffed from a distance, and are central to a number of prestige classes, builds, feats, and psionic powers. They (and animal companions) also gain Hit Dice, and therefore, feats. Familiars don't get any of that.

Scipio
2010-05-26, 01:06 PM
IRT Lycanthromancer

Thanks for making up my mind in ignoring this thread going forward. There are a number of easily refutable points you make, but I don't need to point them out.

DragoonWraith
2010-05-26, 01:08 PM
...

You just had four pages of this argument and you'd seriously get antsy with her for not telling you? If it's something you're unsure of, you ask; there are so many little houserules for things like this in D&D, you do not assume.
Yes, I would ask. No, it would not be the end of the world if it got unmentioned. But I was answering why arguing what RAW actually is is important: So we have a baseline we can work with. Standards are important even if you don't adhere to them, so you know where you diverge and you can communicate this effectively to others.

I have read a lengthy thread on this subject, so I would know to ask. Several posters in this thread never even considered the possibility that Psicrystals wouldn't get feats before this thread: if they played a game DMed by someone who assumed they didn't, there could be a stupid and avoidable argument over it, which is why threads like this are useful.

Foryn Gilnith
2010-05-26, 01:11 PM
I don't need to point them out.

I'm fairly certain you do, actually; they're not awfully obvious in my opinion.

Lycanthromancer
2010-05-26, 01:25 PM
IRT Lycanthromancer

Thanks for making up my mind in ignoring this thread going forward. There are a number of easily refutable points you make, but I don't need to point them out.I'm sure you mean can't point them out, since you really can't argue with the truth without lying about it. And it's not like you can try to trick the rest of us into believing that what we see in the SRD isn't actually there.

Jarian
2010-05-26, 01:28 PM
To summarize the points made so far:

Psicrystals gain HD. Familiars do not.
You don't want Psicrystals to gain feats through HD.
Everything else in the history of 3.5 that meets the requirements of gaining feats does so.
You don't care, Psicrystals are different because you say so.
You still don't want Psicrystals to gain feats.


Why don't you just call it your official houserule and be done with it? :smallsigh:

Scipio
2010-05-26, 01:29 PM
I'm fairly certain you do, actually; they're not awfully obvious in my opinion.

Ok then. I am bored.


Originally Posted by Scipio
Let's play fill in the blank, and see if you are right.

A <blank>'s basic stats including HD, HP, Saves, Skills are derived directly from the owner.

Psicrystal and animal companion only (familiars don't gain HD).

Animal companions HD, Saves and Skills are based on the animal's progression not the master's level. Perhaps I should have been more clear about being "derived directly". HD, HP, Saves and Skills for the psicrystal/familiar are equal to the master's (or in the case of HP equal to 1/2).

The HD for both of them is equal to the owner. In the case of familiar's it is merely for effects related to HD, but they are equal.

Animal companions do not get an intelligence score based on the owner.


Nothing gains the ability to share spells and powers, spell AND power resistance, the ability to deliver both touch-based powers AND spells, and the ability to both scry AND remote view 1/day.

However, if OR is your word of choice, animal companions, familiars, and psicrystals. For most of it, anyway.

The slash merely separated the arcane and psionic equivalent. I would say a simple reading would make this obvious, but we have already established that isn't going to happen. I would love to find the source that grants animal companions spell resistance, touch spell delivery and scrying. I listed six equivalent abilities shared between the two. The animal companion gets 2 out of the 6. I guess I need to find a definition of "most".


That would be familiars; psicrystals can gain multiple bonuses, if the master so chooses.

So his point is that feats can enhance the psicrystal? I thought we were talking about the basics.

His final paragraph mentions all the differences. It has nothing to do with the point I was making.

Lycanthromancer
2010-05-26, 01:43 PM
Animal companions HD, Saves and Skills are based on the animal's progression not the master's level. Perhaps I should have been more clear about being "derived directly". HD, HP, Saves and Skills for the psicrystal/familiar are equal to the master's (or in the case of HP equal to 1/2).The animal companion's hit dice are related to the druid's (or ranger's) level, because the druid's (or ranger's) level determines what it gets from that little table there in the SRD.


The HD for both of them is equal to the owner. In the case of familiar's it is merely for effects related to HD, but they are equal.One is actual hit dice. The other is effective hit dice for a specific purpose. This isn't equal. This isn't equal at all.


Animal companions do not get an intelligence score based on the owner.Ah, but they do gain hit dice, and one of the functions of hit dice is ability score adjustments; add the adjustment to Intelligence, and yes. Yes they do.


The slash merely separated the arcane and psionic equivalent. I would say a simple reading would make this obvious, but we have already established that isn't going to happen. I would love to find the source that grants animal companions spell resistance, touch spell delivery and scrying. I listed six equivalent abilities shared between the two. The animal companion gets 2 out of the 6. I guess I need to find a definition of "most".Actually, you mentioned 7:

1. Special abilities based on the level of the master (which they all get)
2. Alertness (which they all get)
3. Evasion (which they all get)
4. Share spells and/or powers (which they all get)
5. Delivery of touch spells and/or powers (which psicrystals and familiars both get)
6. Spell and/or power resistance (which psicrystals and familiars both get)
7. Scry and/or remote view once per day (which psicrystals and familiars both get)

They all get 4 out of 7. Psicrystals and familiars get the remaining 3. 3/7 is greater than half, so 'most' would be appropriate.


So his point is that feats can enhance the psicrystal? I thought we were talking about the basics.Feats, class abilities, granted abilities, and powers directly related to the psicrystal are directly related to the psicrystal, and therefore count as being directly related to the psicrystal.


His final paragraph mentions all the differences. It has nothing to do with the point I was making.Your point is that familiars and psicrystals are nearly identical, and should be treated as such. My point is that psicrystals are somewhere between animal companions and familiars, with a bunch of additional abilities. They're their own entry in the book, and should be treated as RAW says they should.

Optimystik
2010-05-26, 01:59 PM
Familiars don't derive their HD from their owner.

This is the entire point of this thread.

Christ.

Testify!
*sways*

Scipio
2010-05-26, 02:02 PM
The animal companion's hit dice are related to the druid's (or ranger's) level, because the druid's (or ranger's) level determines what it gets from that little table there in the SRD.

I didn't say related. I said directly derived from, and then I explained what I meant.


Actually, you mentioned 7:

1. Special abilities based on the level of the master (which they all get)
2. Alertness (which they all get)
3. Evasion (which they all get)
4. Share spells and/or powers (which they all get)
5. Delivery of touch spells and/or powers (which psicrystals and familiars both get)
6. Spell and/or power resistance (which psicrystals and familiars both get)
7. Scry and/or remote view once per day (which psicrystals and familiars both get)

They all get 4 out of 7. Psicrystals and familiars get the remaining 3. 3/7 is greater than half, so 'most' would be appropriate.

Animal Companions do not grant their owner alertness. I also did not count "special abilities based on the level of the master", since that is the grouping under which everything else is included.


Feats, class abilities, granted abilities, and powers directly related to the psicrystal are directly related to the psicrystal, and therefore count as being directly related to the psicrystal.

I think we can all agree that there are feats available to improve your familiar, animal companion or psicrystal. It has no bearing on any point I made.


Your point is that familiars and psicrystals are nearly identical, and should be treated as such. My point is that psicrystals are somewhere between animal companions and familiars, with a bunch of additional abilities. They're their own entry in the book, and should be treated as RAW says they should.

Please show me where I said they are "nearly identical". I was merely refuting 2xMachina's point that they are "very different". My point was that the abilities of a psicrystal are similar to a familiar, and then I pointed out all the commonalities.

Zen Master
2010-05-26, 04:38 PM
:headdesk: :headdesk: :headdesk:

We are talking about the actual rules as they are written.

Acromos, your houserules are all well and good - but they are not the rules.

You can't even provide evidence that they were unintentional, that Wizards only accidentally gave them that ability. Evidence would, in fact, indicate that they intended them to get feats.

You can say that that decision was a mistake on Wizards' part (it probably was). You can say that it was the result of shoddy design or lack of playtesting (it probably was). That's fine and no one will argue with you.

But not everyone feels that way, and those are not the rules as written.

You don't have to (in fact, are encouraged not to) play by the rules as written. Houserules are necessary for a sane game. But for the purpose of rules discussions, your talking about houserules as if they were rules only confuses matters and leads to arguments.

I'm familiar with the fixation on RAW discussions on this board.

Frankly, I do not care, and I'll have nothing to do with it. I consider it pointless. I'm sorry, I know the rest of you enjoy it - but to me, it's just senseless.

I discuss perceptions and opinions. Of the game, of the rules, of ... basically everything, on and off these boards.

I hope you realise that I'm not doing this to annoy you. We're just not coming from the same place - nor going in the same direction.

If this instills in you the need to pound your head into the desk, I suggest you simply ignore my answers. I'll feel no ill towards you - I promise =)

Honestly. We're just not talking the same language here. And thats ok by me. I even sometimes feel I learn a bit from the RAW discussions. But I learn more from everything else.

Scipio
2010-05-26, 04:46 PM
I'm familiar with the fixation on RAW discussions on this board.


I learned a lot about this through the course of the discussion. Now I know, and that is half the battle.

Hopefully no one is too . . . raw about it. :smallwink:

DragoonWraith
2010-05-26, 04:49 PM
I'm familiar with the fixation on RAW discussions on this board.

Frankly, I do not care, and I'll have nothing to do with it. I consider it pointless. I'm sorry, I know the rest of you enjoy it - but to me, it's just senseless.

I discuss perceptions and opinions. Of the game, of the rules, of ... basically everything, on and off these boards.

I hope you realise that I'm not doing this to annoy you. We're just not coming from the same place - nor going in the same direction.

If this instills in you the need to pound your head into the desk, I suggest you simply ignore my answers. I'll feel no ill towards you - I promise =)

Honestly. We're just not talking the same language here. And thats ok by me. I even sometimes feel I learn a bit from the RAW discussions. But I learn more from everything else.
My problem is not that you do not care.

My problem is that you inject yourself into discussions of RAW, talking about not-RAW, and confuse everything. It's just utterly unhelpful in the extreme. Your opinions are completely valid, but they're irrelevant in this discussion and therefore you are exceedingly off-topic.

NEO|Phyte
2010-05-26, 04:50 PM
I'm familiar with the fixation on RAW discussions on this board.

Frankly, I do not care, and I'll have nothing to do with it. I consider it pointless. I'm sorry, I know the rest of you enjoy it - but to me, it's just senseless.

There's plenty of point. If everyone goes into the discussion assuming their group's houserules, there's no common frame of reference. As nonsensical as RAW can be, it's a known quantity.

Greenish
2010-05-26, 04:51 PM
Let's play fill in the blank, and see if you are right.

A <blank>'s basic stats including HD, HP, Saves, Skills are derived directly from the owner.

A <blank> has a Natural Armor adjustment and Intelligence score based on the level of the owner.

A <blank> has special abilities based on the owner level including alertness, Improved Evasion, share spells/powers, delivery of touch spells/powers, spell/power resistance, and the ability to scry/remote view the <blank> once per day.

A <blank> grants the owner a bonus to a particular skill, saving throw, etc. based on the type chosen.

Yeah, that is not similar at all.You're forgetting an important point: psicrystal is not a class feature. Animal Companions and Familiars are class features, but psicrystal is gained from a feat, much like Cohorts and Followers.

There's no reason to assume it's more like a familiar than a cohort.

Zen Master
2010-05-26, 04:54 PM
I'm objecting to the fact that you started out by insulting those who argue the rules say psicrystals gain feats by claiming that this was just what they wanted the rules to say and that they wouldn't allow any evidence to sway them from their desired conclusion.

Now you're saying that you don't care what the rules say at all. So will you be withdrawing your previous inflammatory comments? If you don't think those on the gains-feats side are actually wrong, but just want to attack their motives, that seems like nothing more than flaming to me.

Insult? Inflammatory?

I believe I took some pains to indicate that A) this is how I perceive the arguments, that B) that it wasn't meant as an insult, and that C) for my own part, I'm no different.

I'm sorry you feel that I've somehow attacked you. That isn't my intent. However, I cannot and will not be held accountable for how you react to my words, when you react counter to my stated intention.

Now, again: I've said NOTHING about right or wrong. I've made an assumption about the ... lets call it the origin of the arguments. Maybe even a somewhat sweeping assumption. Which some people dislike - but personally, I kinda think people can think for themselves, and see that I'm at least partially ironic. Maybe I'm wrong.

At any rate. My initial claim remains. I think the primary motivation for arguing that psicrystals gain feats is because you want them to. That there are indications in the rules to justify it is circumstantial.

And naturally, this isn't true of everyone. And see my sig. And ... really, ease up. If you consider my perceptions to be wrong, you can consider me to be imperceptive or stupid. But to feel insulted is just superfluous.

Optimystik
2010-05-26, 04:54 PM
I'm familiar with the fixation on RAW discussions on this board.

Frankly, I do not care, and I'll have nothing to do with it.

Then... why exactly are you posting in a thread about RAW? :smallconfused:

EDIT for relevant OP quote:


There seems to be a lot of people on this forum who believe that psicrystal's get feats as they "advance". I could be wrong on this, but I just don't see anything to suggest this is the case.

...

Am I missing something?

Bolded for emphasis.

Yuki Akuma
2010-05-26, 05:00 PM
I'm familiar with the fixation on RAW discussions on this board.

Frankly, I do not care, and I'll have nothing to do with it. I consider it pointless. I'm sorry, I know the rest of you enjoy it - but to me, it's just senseless.

I discuss perceptions and opinions. Of the game, of the rules, of ... basically everything, on and off these boards.

I hope you realise that I'm not doing this to annoy you. We're just not coming from the same place - nor going in the same direction.

If this instills in you the need to pound your head into the desk, I suggest you simply ignore my answers. I'll feel no ill towards you - I promise =)

Honestly. We're just not talking the same language here. And thats ok by me. I even sometimes feel I learn a bit from the RAW discussions. But I learn more from everything else.

Why would you go into a thread asking where the rules say x and not talk about the rules?

Scipio
2010-05-26, 05:04 PM
Why would you go into a thread asking where the rules say x and not talk about the rules?

Because the rules are about more than just RAW?

I would not want to speak for Acromos, but I can say we are not members of the Cult of RAW.

kamikasei
2010-05-26, 05:04 PM
Insult? Inflammatory?

I believe I took some pains to indicate that A) this is how I perceive the arguments, that B) that it wasn't meant as an insult, and that C) for my own part, I'm no different.

I'm sorry you feel that I've somehow attacked you. That isn't my intent. However, I cannot and will not be held accountable for how you react to my words, when you react counter to my stated intention.

You accused others of arguing in bad faith. That's insulting. Saying "this is just my perception" doesn't make it less insulting. Saying "I don't mean to be insulting" doesn't make it less insulting. It was an insult.


Because the rules are about more than just RAW?

But the only place where the rules say anything is in the RAW.

If your question had been "does this make sense? Is this a good rule?" then more than RAW would be involved. But your question was about what the rules say and therefore the rules as they are written are what's under discussion.

Greenish
2010-05-26, 05:05 PM
Insult? Inflammatory?

I believe I took some pains to indicate that A) this is how I perceive the arguments, that B) that it wasn't meant as an insult, and that C) for my own part, I'm no different.
Everyone who argues that psicrystals gain feats, do so because they want psycrystals to have feats. You arrive at that conclusion, then go look for the evidence to support it.
You imply that everyone who doesn't agree with you is willfully wrong just to gain more power.

You claim that they misinterpret and selectively pick evidence just to support their own conclusions.

When you're proven wrong, you retreat to "well I didn't mean the rules as they actually are".


Well, I think you're being obnoxious on purpose, but I don't mean that as an insult, it's just how I perceive you. :smallamused:

[Edit]:
Because the rules are about more than just RAW?You asked how the rules are, not how they ought to be.

I would not want to speak for Acromos, but I can say we are not members of the Cult of RAW.Are you trying to troll your own thread, or does it come naturally to you? No one plays by the RAW, but if you ask how the rules are, people will tell you how they are.

Zen Master
2010-05-26, 05:05 PM
There's plenty of point. If everyone goes into the discussion assuming their group's houserules, there's no common frame of reference. As nonsensical as RAW can be, it's a known quantity.

Politicians, philosophers, and preeetty much everyone else has been able to discuss opinion since before we climbed down from the trees.

Yes, RAW is a known quantity. To me, it is also a quantity without value or relevance. RAW I can find in the books, I really don't need a forum for it.

I truly do value opinion far more. Despite the fact that you cannot win opinion.

Optimystik
2010-05-26, 05:07 PM
Because the rules are about more than just RAW?

I would not want to speak for Acromos, but I can say we are not members of the Cult of RAW.

You: "I don't understand where people get this idea from."
Us: "From the rules."
You: "Where in the rules?"
Us: "Here. [Links provided]"
You: "You're a cult!!!11!!1"

Yuki Akuma
2010-05-26, 05:10 PM
...

Why would you ask a rules question and then object to it being answered by the rules?

What?

What?!

How do... why would... I...

Optimystik
2010-05-26, 05:11 PM
...

Why would you ask a rules question and then object to it being answered by the rules?

What?

What?!

How do... why would... I...

What is this I don't even (http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/what-is-this-i-dont-even)

kamikasei
2010-05-26, 05:15 PM
Yes, RAW is a known quantity. To me, it is also a quantity without value or relevance. RAW I can find in the books, I really don't need a forum for it.

Yet the OP seemed to need a forum to know what the rules said, since that was what he asked.

Jarian
2010-05-26, 05:30 PM
At the risk of repeating others...

What is this I don't even.

Words absolutely fail me at this point. Just... *headdesks forever*

Lycanthromancer
2010-05-26, 06:19 PM
In before threadlock.

Foryn Gilnith
2010-05-26, 07:59 PM
Do you people know why this thread turned so quickly and frighteningly hostile?

Scipio
2010-05-26, 08:04 PM
Do you people know why this thread turned so quickly and frighteningly hostile?

Yeah, I was having a bad day, and my last comments were a bit too harsh.

Greenish
2010-05-26, 08:05 PM
Do you people know why this thread turned so quickly and frighteningly hostile?It was Convolvulus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asterix_and_the_Roman_Agent)!

AstralFire
2010-05-26, 08:40 PM
Yes, I would ask. No, it would not be the end of the world if it got unmentioned. But I was answering why arguing what RAW actually is is important: So we have a baseline we can work with. Standards are important even if you don't adhere to them, so you know where you diverge and you can communicate this effectively to others.

I have read a lengthy thread on this subject, so I would know to ask. Several posters in this thread never even considered the possibility that Psicrystals wouldn't get feats before this thread: if they played a game DMed by someone who assumed they didn't, there could be a stupid and avoidable argument over it, which is why threads like this are useful.

Fair 'nough. Can't say I quite understand it, still*, but fair 'nough.

* I understand it for other subjects. This one in particular just kind of baffles me still.

Runestar
2010-05-26, 08:49 PM
Do you people know why this thread turned so quickly and frighteningly hostile?

Because people fail to see the distinction between RAW and RAI?

Why people simply cannot accept a "Yes, by the rules, it would seem a psicrystal does gain additional HD, and feats along with it, but good luck trying to sneak this past your DM" response is beyond me.

Being a rules debate, I don't see what intent or game balance has to do with it. :smalleek:

Magikeeper
2010-05-26, 09:13 PM
So, I am pretty sure the feat thing was unintended. It was, IMO, a very fortunate mistake. Granted, it made psicrystals even more awesome than they already are (which is pretty awesome – I have yet to see a psion not take one despite it not being a required class ability).

You know what isn’t awesome? Familiars. Anyone interested in power trades that glaring weakness with anything they can. And that familiar granting feat is getting rather dusty. The fact that psycrystals gain feats has helped me convince people to house rule familiar HD working the same way (in addition to counting all arcane casting classes). I have a familiar right now that is actually pretty useful. First time I’ve ever bothered with one over one over the alternate class features. It’s still not as awesome as a psicrystal, but I’m actually happy with it and will continue to be happy with it into the higher levels.

To get to the point, psicrystals get feats by RAW and I think the proper response is to give familiars feats too.

Flickerdart
2010-05-26, 09:20 PM
Because people fail to see the distinction between RAW and RAI?

Why people simply cannot accept a "Yes, by the rules, it would seem a psicrystal does gain additional HD, and feats along with it, but good luck trying to sneak this past your DM" response is beyond me.

Being a rules debate, I don't see what intent or game balance has to do with it. :smalleek:
You mean you wouldn't allow psicrystal feats, and believe that nobody else would? I...would not, I think, enjoy gaming under you.

Foryn Gilnith
2010-05-26, 09:31 PM
good luck trying to sneak this past your DM" response is beyond me.

Because somebody else already opened up the can of worms...

Why does it need to be sneaked past a DM? Why can't it go through up-front? When I heard about psicrystal feats, my reaction was not "What? That's nonsense." My reaction was "Oh, I never noticed that." And I've never used a psicrystal since, so I wasn't just reading what I wanted to read.

Optimystik
2010-05-26, 09:38 PM
You know what isn’t awesome? Familiars.

I strenuously beg to differ. Even without the feats, familliars have a lot of utility. They effectively double your actions (through delivering spells and counterspelling) and there are so many to choose from that you can get whatever abilities you need.

DragoonWraith
2010-05-26, 10:48 PM
You know what isn’t awesome? Familiars.
Imbue Familiar with Spell Ability would like a word with you.

Runestar
2010-05-27, 02:22 AM
You mean you wouldn't allow psicrystal feats, and believe that nobody else would? I...would not, I think, enjoy gaming under you.

If you read my earlier post, you would have inferred that I am in fact a proponent of psicrystals getting feats, not least because it lets them take martial study feats to access maneuvers which they can then use to augment the party. :smallamused:

Blackfang108
2010-05-27, 08:47 AM
If you read my earlier post, you would have inferred that I am in fact a proponent of psicrystals getting feats, not least because it lets them take martial study feats to access maneuvers which they can then use to augment the party. :smallamused:

I have a friend who's rolling up an Ardent/Cleric/Psycic Theurge (for dual 9s.)

I'm helping him with building his character, as I know more about Psionics than he does.

I am SO doing this to his Psicrystal. :smallbiggrin:

Lycanthromancer
2010-05-27, 10:29 AM
I have a friend who's rolling up an Ardent/Cloistered Cleric/Psycic Theurge (for dual 9s.)Fixed it for you. :smallamused:

Susano-wo
2010-05-27, 10:35 AM
wait wait wait.
back up.
Optimystik: Familiars Counterspelling? How does this work? As a WB/Sorc with a falcon familiar (ok, hawk, but I say Falcon :P)...I am very interested.

Also, as a side note to the whole affair: I find my familiar very useful, even without the way my DM runs our link (we can communicate basic thoughts, though the familiar has a bird point of view on things, so I can't necessarily communicate really complex ideas). Flight=scout, and my favorite part: Flying familiar+Benign Transposition= Battlefield Teleport with 1st lvl spell. Damn, I love the transposition spells. I love them so much me and the DM are working on mass versions for later spell levels ^_^

Optimystik
2010-05-27, 10:37 AM
You're better off with Ur-Priest there. While an Ardent can indeed get 9s paired with normal Cleric, you miss out on a lot of mid-level powers and a great deal of base PP.

However, Ur-Priest needs less of a commitment to reach 9s, which in turn gives the Ardent side more room to grow.

As for the thread, I don't think it was all that hostile. Yuki, kami et al. have expressed incredulity at Acromos' and Scipio's argument, but I haven't seen any personal attacks.

The Glyphstone
2010-05-27, 11:09 AM
You're better off with Ur-Priest there. While an Ardent can indeed get 9s paired with normal Cleric, you miss out on a lot of mid-level powers and a great deal of base PP.

However, Ur-Priest needs less of a commitment to reach 9s, which in turn gives the Ardent side more room to grow.

As for the thread, I don't think it was all that hostile. Yuki, kami et al. have expressed incredulity at Acromos' and Scipio's argument, but I haven't seen any personal attacks.

Well, the 'cult of RAW' was pretty close.

Ia! Ia! :smallbiggrin:

Blackfang108
2010-05-27, 12:40 PM
Fixed it for you. :smallamused:

Not doing cloistered Cleric. It doesn't make sense for the character, and I'm not trying to break the game anyway. (at least, not insanely.)

Edit: Opt: It IS an evil campaign, so Ur-Priest IS viable, but no.

We have some non-ToB Martial Characters. (I'm doing a Crusader, myself.)

lsfreak
2010-05-27, 01:36 PM
wait wait wait.
back up.
Optimystik: Familiars Counterspelling? How does this work? As a WB/Sorc with a falcon familiar (ok, hawk, but I say Falcon :P)...I am very interested.

Likely imbue familiar with spell ability, and then loading him up with dispel magic. Each round he uses his turn to ready a counterspell (or, my preferance, ready an Orb of Force to 'counterspell').

Hendel
2010-05-27, 01:57 PM
Likely imbue familiar with spell ability, and then loading him up with dispel magic. Each round he uses his turn to ready a counterspell (or, my preferance, ready an Orb of Force to 'counterspell').

I've done just that with a familiar. Works great at low levels, not so hot at the upper reaches.

On a different note, just for the sake of getting my next question answered, I am going on the premise that psicrystals do indeed get feats (so if you are still not convinced that they do, then you do not need to reply to this post). I see where people are saying that the manifester can somehow use the feats that the psicrystal has. How is this possible?

I know it is possible with Awareness, but it says in the description that the manifester gets that ability as well. How is the jump then made to where a manifester can share the other feats (feats, not powers as I know how they share those)?

Susano-wo
2010-05-27, 01:59 PM
@Isfreak. NOw I feel silly. I figured it was some obvious fam. ability, and I even checked he SRD. I guess I was looking in too curory a matter. Damn, I was hoping it was something I could do. I seriously doubt I am advancing enough sorc levels to get that abil. (modifying ToB Gish prestige to make sense with the Char, so I won't have much more if any more than the 4 sorc levels I have now)

--on second look, I still don't see it in the entry, so I'm guessing its a feat. whats the requirement?

Ah well. :P

SInce I'm here already...
RE: The Actual Topic of the thread: It's painfully obvious due to the different wording in both entries that RAW is they get feats. That seems a bit unbalanced to me, and *could* be a mistake, but its hardly the same as a typo in an ability name or something. Also I'm not too worried that Familiars aren't necessarily the awesomest feature in a caster's arsenal--they have all those nifty spells for that.

Though I do like making the familiar a feat, or at least a swappable class feature (like PF does), since not every char concept will work with a familiar. (Even when I look at a char from a what can he do perp., I am still thinking of style and flavor ^ ^)

...of course I think all this has been covered, but I wanted to add my 2 cents to the side of sanity and actually reading the rules as is, then applying any tweaks...and oh I want to tweak so many things!><

[email protected] [/quibble] it doesn't share Alertness. It has it (in the monster entry) and as a separate ability it grants the caster Alertness when the crystal is w/in 5ft. [/end quibble]
and I think the trick is a power/feat called Feat Leach

Volthawk
2010-05-27, 01:59 PM
I've done just that with a familiar. Works great at low levels, not so hot at the upper reaches.

On a different note, just for the sake of getting my next question answered, I am going on the premise that psicrystals do indeed get feats (so if you are still not convinced that they do, then you do not need to reply to this post). I see where people are saying that the manifester can somehow use the feats that the psicrystal has. How is this possible?

I know it is possible with Awareness, but it says in the description that the manifester gets that ability as well. How is the jump then made to where a manifester can share the other feats (feats, not powers as I know how they share those)?

Due to a little power called Feat Leech (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/featLeech.htm). Only psionic/metapsionic, though.

Scipio
2010-05-27, 02:01 PM
On a different note, just for the sake of getting my next question answered, I am going on the premise that psicrystals do indeed get feats (so if you are still not convinced that they do, then you do not need to reply to this post). I see where people are saying that the manifester can somehow use the feats that the psicrystal has. How is this possible?

I know it is possible with Awareness, but it says in the description that the manifester gets that ability as well. How is the jump then made to where a manifester can share the other feats (feats, not powers as I know how they share those)?

Using the Feat Leech power from XPH.

Yuki Akuma
2010-05-27, 02:01 PM
On a different note, just for the sake of getting my next question answered, I am going on the premise that psicrystals do indeed get feats (so if you are still not convinced that they do, then you do not need to reply to this post). I see where people are saying that the manifester can somehow use the feats that the psicrystal has. How is this possible?

Like I said before, Feat Leech (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/featLeech.htm).

Hendel
2010-05-27, 02:05 PM
Like I said before, Feat Leech (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/featLeech.htm).

Thank you times three to Volthawk, Scipio, and Yuki!! (sometimes the threads get so long to read every single post or they get forgotten)

Optimystik
2010-05-27, 02:19 PM
Likely imbue familiar with spell ability, and then loading him up with dispel magic. Each round he uses his turn to ready a counterspell (or, my preferance, ready an Orb of Force to 'counterspell').

Well, the nice thing about actually counterspelling (rather than "counterspelling" via smacking the erstwhile mage in the face with an orb) is that counterspelling has no attack roll, energy type or SR, so no chance to miss. Though you might, of course, fail the dispel check itself.

You can share Battlemagic Perception/Duelward with your familiar as well.