[3.5] A Translation of Vancian Spellcasting to Psionic Mechanics

[Ernir]

I am one of those who thinks the psionic subsystem is one of the most elegantly designed things in D&D 3.5. In many ways, I think it's how spellcasting should have been done in 3.5. And I'd like to use it for more things.

But when I try to replace the core vancian casting with psionics, I run into a couple of problems.

Options are missing. There are things the core classes can do that simply can't be faithfully replicated with psionics. The psionic system is powerful enough, no doubt about that. It can pretty much always get the job done. But if I wanted to, say, play a necromancer, I'd probably have to reflavor Astral Constructs as my zombies and some Stygian powers as my negative energy effects. Which works, but wasn't really what I was looking for in the first place. Which brings me to the second problem:
The flavor doesn't always fit. Now, I think it's cool - if viewed on its own terms. The crystals and tattoo theme the books have going on is a perfectly good way to look at magic, but in my experience, it doesn't always live up to people's ideas about what D&D magic "should" look like. DMs still ban psionics for "flavor reasons", or because it doesn't "fit their setting". Which, I must say, I understand perfectly.

So what can I do? Well, I devised a twofold solution to the twofold problem.
I translated the core spells and classes over to psionic mechanics.
As for the system itself (as well as some doodads like the basic magic items), I changed every reference to "power", "manifester", "crystals" and "psionic", and so on to... well, their arcane counterparts. In other words, when people say "just reflavor psionics to fit your setting/concept" - I'd like to think I did precisely that.

And here is the result. (https://github.com/Ernir/VancianToPsionics/releases/download/v0.12b/VancianToPsionics.pdf) (.pdf, 2.9 MB) I suggest linking to this thread rather than hotlinking, I expect this thread to be rather more permanent.
It includes a complete conversion of the psionic base system, feats and fundamental items over to magical terminology, as well as, more importantly, translated classes to utilize the mechanics, and a relatively thorough conversion of the Sorcerer/Wizard, Cleric, Bard, Paladin, Assassin and Blackguard lists over to what 3.5 fans know as psionic mechanics. For the classes presented so far, it should be playable from 1-20.

Now, like all homebrewers, I hope that this is actually useful, and that I can get some feedback. But I don't expect anyone to just accept that the stuff I churned out is awesome enough to read the over 300 pages of it. Instead, I suggest that the potentially interested do the following:
Download the document (see link above). If you know how psionics in 3.5 work, proceed to step 3. All you will find in the first few chapters is that this is a reprinting of the psionic mechanics, that the Wizard works just like the Psion, and so on. If you don't, well, please read the Wizard class, and tell me whether it makes any sense to you! :smalltongue: Navigate to the "Spells" section (the pdf is thoroughly bookmarked). Find your favourite spell or two. Tell me what you think! You don't need to be a grandmaster of homebrewing to tell if I royally screwed something up, so please tell me if you find something odd, no matter how trivial or "just your opinion" you think it is.

For those that are still reading, I have a FAQ for you: There's a spell point variant (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/spellPoints.htm) in Unearthed Arcana/the SRD, as well as about 500 homebrew versions. Why, oh why, Ernir, are you trying to invent the wheel?
The primary difference between this project and every other spell point variant I have seen is simple - I rewrote the spells so that they take the system into account. No other spell point system I have seen has done this.
In addition, this isn't really a new spell point system. This is the well known and researched psionic system, which we all know works. I just added a paint job and a new bell or two.
Did you fix magic forever?
No, I didn't. My primary goal was to give the vancian flavor a better system, balancing it was not my primary concern. The Wizard class resulting from this is still exorbitantly more powerful than any "mundane" class in WotC D&D, if you ask me. That being said, I did rewrite all the spells, and of course I couldn't resist ironing out some of the kinks I know of. When it came to this, I concentrated my efforts on getting rid of the spells that have truly unbounded/uncontrollable consequences. Wizards can probably still solo most level appropriate encounters, but I hope they'll now run into trouble solo-ing some campaign settings.
Did you leave some spells out?
Lots of spells weren't precisely reproduced. Most of those, however, I just merged with others. The augment system provided by psionics makes it particularly easy to merge spell chains (that is, spells that are just greater/lesser versions of other spells). In addition, I merged some spells that I knew would just never be taken as a spell known otherwise.
Did you add a lot of your own content?
Mixing the core spells up with my own eccentricities was not my original intent. Nevertheless, I did eventually decide to make up quite a few spells of my own (and steal a few psionic powers), usually to fill in nearly-empty spell levels. These are marked as such in the spell listing with an asterisk.
Did you change the psionic base system at all?
A few changes were necessary, for example, changing the discipline/subdiscipline arrangement to fit the school/subschool structure of traditional casting.
But I did make some less trivial changes.
Most significantly, save DCs are now calculated using the number of spell points (power points) spent on the spell, rather than the level of the spell (power). Also, you can now spend more points on a spell than given in its spell points (power points) line, usually to increase the save DC (in other words, all spells now have a "null augment"). This is mostly because adding "Augment: For every 2 additional spell points you spend, this spell's save DC increases by 1." to every single thing was starting to look really ugly.
I added a "Polymorph" subschool to the transmutation school to contain the mechanics of my new Polymorph-ish spells.
I added a "minion" type of spells to put a cap on the number of will-less minions you can have. This is a recent addition, I have yet to do much with it.
Are you done working on this?
Hell no. Next up is to update more magic items, and hack on some epic support. Maybe make some base classes of my own! I'll be here for a while.
What are you working on right now?
New base classes, and trying to find the courage needed to tackle Epic.
Can I contribute?
Yes, you can! Feedback in this thread is always appreciated, much of it has already made its way into the document one way or another. If you are daring (and have the tiniest bit of LaTeX know-how), you can head over to Github (https://github.com/Ernir/VancianToPsionics) and have a peek at the source, too.

Thanks for reading this far, please tell me what you think!

[Welknair]

Yes. Just yes. This looks well thought out, sensible, balanced, and interesting. And it uses my Principle of Equivalence! :smallbiggrin:

Edit: Only thing I see thusfar that I dislike is the Sorcerer. Surely you could come up with something for them? Sort of like the Wilder, perhaps (but with more cast-y, less 3/4 BAB)?

[Ernir]

Yes. Just yes. This looks well thought out, sensible, balanced, and interesting.
Well, that's high praise. Thanks. :smallredface:

And it uses my Principle of Equivalence! :smallbiggrin:
*Does a search for "Principle of Equivalence"*

Yeah, point-based systems kind of work like that.

Edit: Only thing I see thusfar that I dislike is the Sorcerer. Surely you could come up with something for them? Sort of like the Wilder, perhaps (but with more cast-y, less 3/4 BAB)?
No worries, the Sorcerer is next up. :smallwink:

Not that it'll be anything really drastic (it will share the casting mechanic with the Wizard, of course), but I'm going to try to find enough stuff to make it worthy of its own chassis.

[Welknair]

Not that it'll be anything really drastic (it will share the casting mechanic with the Wizard, of course), but I'm going to try to find enough stuff to make it worthy of its own chassis.

That's all I'm asking. :smallsmile:

[Ormur]

I haven't read it all but since this is based on sorc/wiz spells I don't think I have to. The psionics mechanics are certainly very elegant but what has stopped me heretofore is that I don't know the powers and class mechanics well enough. I'd certainly consider using this to replace Vancian casting, if only because of the acconting, especially for classes that know the entire spell list.

Translating every spell has also (I hope) given you oppurtunity to fix the broken spells even if you haven't achived "balance".

[chando]

Found a typo, Heroism spell is on the spell list as a lvl 3 spell, and it costs 5sp to cast, but on its description it says Wizard 2 on level.

Great work, kip it up!

[Ernir]

Beta 1.01 is up! Now including the Sorcerer.


Translating every spell has also (I hope) given you oppurtunity to fix the broken spells even if you haven't achived "balance".
I did use the opportunity to change the big offenders like Polymorph (now split into about a dozen spells), Planar Binding, Gate, and Shapechange.

Some spells I simply haven't tackled at all yet, these include Shrink Item, Polymorph Any Object, and Rope Trick.

Found a typo, Heroism spell is on the spell list as a lvl 3 spell, and it costs 5sp to cast, but on its description it says Wizard 2 on level.

Great work, kip it up!

Thanks. I've fixed it. Should be a level 3 spell.

[Jallorn]

At first glance, this looks incredible, but I'm curious, did you transcribe every spell, or just Core? I'm guessing just Core.

Just glanced at the Sorcerer and Wizard, and they seem much more balanced now, both are limited, and both get new spell levels at the same level. I know some people might be disappointed at the Wizard's loss of ability to learn any spell, so you might consider doing something similar to the Erudite for him. Perhaps, in exchange for not specializing, he gets the Erudites kind of feature. Fluff it as he doesn't have the same mastery as other wizards because he has such a large repertoire.

The mechanics aren't perfect though, so perhaps instead, he has to pick his spells for the day at random, basically, those are the ones he can remember. In this way, he can do anything , but he doesn't always know what he can do. Perhaps allow him to add or subtract up to half his Int modifier (if positive) rounded down to the random roll to influence his spells a little. That's getting into slightly dangerous territory though, so I'm not entirely sure about that one.

[RunicLGB]

I've seen a couple of these translations before, but none of them really ring true for me, and here why.

Source: One of the reasons Magic uses a very different structure from Psionics (or Incarnum or Ninjas with ki or...) Is because the power has a different source. Psionics use an internalized power source, aka their own mental ability, to achieve their powers. Magic is traditionally an external source, be it divine (granted by a god) or arcane (channeled from the universe). Translating the magic system to psionics places that "magic point reserve" on the table, and suddenly the power is internalized, otherwize why is there that numeric limit on how much I can draw? It can be rationalized, but it just doesn't feel right to me.

Spontaneous Casters: Certainly the break in the above argument are spontaneous casters, but ven spontaneous casters still get this energy from around them, rather than necesarily all from within. They have a talent for acessing that pool of magical energy, rather than having leanred to do it through careful study or having earned it through rigourous prayer. While they do adopt easier they start to feel less like their prepratory brethren, and while they are meant to have a different feel, its not supposed to be that different.

Spell Levels Vs. Augmentation: This is the classic difference between Magic and Psionics, and I like it. It creates a vast gulf between the two systems, a stylistic chasm. It lets a Psion, a Wizard, A wilder, and A sorcerer glare at eachother and know that each one has a very different power from the others, and that they weild it in very a different way.



Other than my personal beefs though, looking through the document I didn't really see anything all that origional. The Wizard looked like a Psion with a different name, and the sorcerer looked identical, minus specialization and a higher power point limit. Assigning a power point cost to spells (1+2 per spell level over 1) isn't very hard, so If you want to translate your Psion as a necromancer you could just give him the appropriate powers(spells with the cost equation plugged in), dress him like a sorcerer and call it a day, rather than claim to make a whole new system.

[Ernir]

At first glance, this looks incredible, but I'm curious, did you transcribe every spell, or just Core? I'm guessing just Core.
Thanks!

These are only core spells (and a few of my own). The rest isn't OGL, so I can't wholesale reproduce them.

Just glanced at the Sorcerer and Wizard, and they seem much more balanced now, both are limited, and both get new spell levels at the same level. I know some people might be disappointed at the Wizard's loss of ability to learn any spell, so you might consider doing something similar to the Erudite for him. Perhaps, in exchange for not specializing, he gets the Erudites kind of feature. Fluff it as he doesn't have the same mastery as other wizards because he has such a large repertoire.

The mechanics aren't perfect though, so perhaps instead, he has to pick his spells for the day at random, basically, those are the ones he can remember. In this way, he can do anything , but he doesn't always know what he can do. Perhaps allow him to add or subtract up to half his Int modifier (if positive) rounded down to the random roll to influence his spells a little. That's getting into slightly dangerous territory though, so I'm not entirely sure about that one.
Not a bad idea.

There being no "generalist" type of Wizard nags me a bit at the moment. And the Erudite way of doing things is pretty cool.
Problem is that Erudites are also pretty much loose cannons in the system...

I've seen a couple of these translations before, but none of them really ring true for me, and here why.

Source: One of the reasons Magic uses a very different structure from Psionics (or Incarnum or Ninjas with ki or...) Is because the power has a different source. Psionics use an internalized power source, aka their own mental ability, to achieve their powers. Magic is traditionally an external source, be it divine (granted by a god) or arcane (channeled from the universe). Translating the magic system to psionics places that "magic point reserve" on the table, and suddenly the power is internalized, otherwize why is there that numeric limit on how much I can draw? It can be rationalized, but it just doesn't feel right to me.

Spontaneous Casters: Certainly the break in the above argument are spontaneous casters, but ven spontaneous casters still get this energy from around them, rather than necesarily all from within. They have a talent for acessing that pool of magical energy, rather than having leanred to do it through careful study or having earned it through rigourous prayer. While they do adopt easier they start to feel less like their prepratory brethren, and while they are meant to have a different feel, its not supposed to be that different.

Spell Levels Vs. Augmentation: This is the classic difference between Magic and Psionics, and I like it. It creates a vast gulf between the two systems, a stylistic chasm. It lets a Psion, a Wizard, A wilder, and A sorcerer glare at eachother and know that each one has a very different power from the others, and that they weild it in very a different way.
Valid points.

If you like vancian casting the way it is, and think it should retain the things that sets it apart from the other magic system, you aren't likely to find anything of great interest here.

It may help to understand my position to know that I think of what I did here as a gamist (as in GNS theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNS_Theory)) tool, which leaves the interpretation of what it means within the game world up to each individual GM/player.

Other than my personal beefs though, looking through the document I didn't really see anything all that origional. The Wizard looked like a Psion with a different name, and the sorcerer looked identical, minus specialization and a higher power point limit.
If it doesn't look original - I'm glad to hear it, actually. I was trying to add as little as I could of my own ideas.


Assigning a power point cost to spells (1+2 per spell level over 1) isn't very hard, so If you want to translate your Psion as a necromancer you could just give him the appropriate powers(spells with the cost equation plugged in), dress him like a sorcerer and call it a day, rather than claim to make a whole new system.
Here I disagree.
Hacking a power/spell point cost equation on to the Wizard spell list doesn't quite do the trick. Aside from the differences inherent in the systems (material components and whatnot), you run into issues of scaling and redundancy, and a bunch of tiny little other oddities. These are issues that can be resolved, of course, but most of them are not trivial.
Resolving these issues for you/your DM is... pretty much what this project is about.

[Yora]

This is a lot of stuff to read, so I'm going to ask directly:

For my campaign, I have removed all spellcasters and replaced them with refluffed psions. But that makes a lot of effects that exist only as spells unavailable. Can I just use your spells with a standard psion, or are there any additional things I have to consider?

[Veyr]

How on earth is a point-based system versus slot-based system different in terms of internal vs. external? Traditionally slot-based has been external and point-based has been internal, but there's absolutely nothing inherent (that I can see, anyway!) about them that makes these things true.

Anyway, Ernir, this is awesome, but you know that. Very nice work all around.

[Welknair]

This is a lot of stuff to read, so I'm going to ask directly:

For my campaign, I have removed all spellcasters and replaced them with refluffed psions. But that makes a lot of effects that exist only as spells unavailable. Can I just use your spells with a standard psion, or are there any additional things I have to consider?

In short: Yes. These spells are divvied into nine levels with point costs the same as powers of equal level. They even have Augments!


Taking a look at the Sorcerer... I was hoping for a bit more differentiation between the Sorcerer and the Wizard. Currently the Sorcerer is different only by greater raw power, less versatility, and limited access to specialized spells. I was thinking something along the lines of the Demented One's Spell Flux (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=194510) would be in order. Besides that, looking good. :smallsmile:

[Ernir]

This is a lot of stuff to read, so I'm going to ask directly:

For my campaign, I have removed all spellcasters and replaced them with refluffed psions. But that makes a lot of effects that exist only as spells unavailable. Can I just use your spells with a standard psion, or are there any additional things I have to consider?

On the technical end, you'd have to
Remove the V/S components, and pick a psionic display instead.
Possibly add an augment like "For every 2 additional power points you spend, the save DC of this power increases by 1" to a lot of spells. This was one thing I really did change in the psionic system.

Apart from that it should more or less work.

Be wary of things that increase manifester level, though.
The way I did it, augments tend to duplicate the effects of higher level spells, so you may end up with players getting access to level-inappropriate abilities if they get their hands on powerful manifester level boosters.


(Of course, if you're going to use reflavored Psions, I'd recommend you just use the reflavored Psion Wizard class I made, but I may be biased. :smalltongue:)


Taking a look at the Sorcerer... I was hoping for a bit more differentiation between the Sorcerer and the Wizard. Currently the Sorcerer is different only by greater raw power, less versatility, and limited access to specialized spells. I was thinking something along the lines of the Demented One's Spell Flux (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=194510) would be in order. Besides that, looking good. :smallsmile:
Yes, it isn't as different from the Wizard as I'd like. =/

Spell Flux, you say? Interesting. I'll look into it when I get back to my own 'puter! :smalltongue:
Thanks.

I'd definitely need to change how it increases your caster level, though. But adapting it would be a given anyway.

[Jallorn]

Yeah, I think both the Wizard and the Sorcerer could use some actual class features. Nothing big, just something utilitarian. Preferably something usable even when out of spell points.

[Melayl]

(snip) Magic is traditionally an external source, be it divine (granted by a god) or arcane (channeled from the universe). Translating the magic system to psionics places that "magic point reserve" on the table, and suddenly the power is internalized, otherwize why is there that numeric limit on how much I can draw? It can be rationalized, but it just doesn't feel right to me. (snip)

As someone else has stated, they had a limit before -- the number of spell slots of each level. That was even more of a limit, if you ask me -- they had all this power, but could only do so many of each level? Why couldn't they save up those lower level slots to power a higher level spell? Limited, indeed.

Also, you can look at it from the perspective that there is no limit on that external power, merely a limit on how much they can handle channeling in a day.

[Prime32]

This might interest you. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=11438)

[Garryl]

I like what you've done so far. The changes to the actual spells seem well thought, from what I've seen so far. I especially like the clarifications in Anti-Magic Field. It's always fun to see healing back in Necromancy. Building Permanency into the spells is smart.

Overall, I have to say that this is great. I look forward to seeing what you do with the divine casters.

Specific comments:

Skills

Concentration: The subheading should be "Gain Magical Focus," not "Gain Psionic Focus." Similarly, under "Check," there are several references to manifesting powers where it should be changed to casting spells.


Feats

Spellstaff Containment: Refers to "the crystal" being within 5 feet of you instead of the staff.


Spells

Aligned Protection: The first augment only accounts for the Protection from/Magic Circle against Evil version, preventing nongood creatures from entering, rather than those with an opposed alignment.

Animal's Movement: The example speed increases for Cheetah's Legs are true for a "multiplication" factor of 6, not 5.

Aura of Fire: Needs the "Spell Resistance: See text" line.

Chain Lightning: The cold option for this spell refers to the save DC to reduce the damage of a missile, rather than an arc.

Cone of Cold: The sonic option for this spell indicates that it deals 1 damage per die, rather than -1 damage per die (i.e.: 1 damage less than normal, as opposed to minimum damage).

Contingency: Not vital, but it would be nice to see this rewritten a little bit to clarify how it is augmented. Also note that both Psionic Contingency and the original Contingency have maximum spell/power levels equal to one third your CL/ML, not maximum SP/PP spent. I'm not sure if this is a mistranslation or part of your tweaks. There's also something slicker about using an immediate action to trigger it rather than a predetermined condition. That might also account for the nerf in the effectiveness of the companion spell.

Darkness: The augmentation options should be cleaned up. The fact that you can only augment it in one way (not both) should be made more explicit. Additionally, the indication of how you can spend a number of spell points to counter/dispel Light spells indicates that you can spend as little as 1 SP, despite the spell's cost being 3. Suggested fix:
Augment: You can augment the spell in one (but not both) of the following ways:
1. ...
2. ...
In addition, you may spend any number of additional spell points when casting this spell (subject to your normal limits). While they do not directly provide any additional benefits, they still contribute to determining what Light spells can be countered or dispelled.


Daze: I know that the psionic version has the exact same augment, but that wording always irks me. I think it should be "For every additional spell point you spend, the maximum hit dice of creatures this spell can affect increases by 1." Feel free to ignore me if you prefer.

Deadly Fight: Should probably have the Death descriptor.

Deadly Fog: Should say "You choose between acid, cold, electricity, or fire damage" instead of "...electricity, re damage." The acid option for this spell indicates that it deals 1 damage per die, rather than -1 damage per die (i.e.: 1 damage less than normal, as opposed to minimum damage).

Dispel Magic, Dispelling Touch: You may wish to change the augment to increasing the maximum bonus to your dispel check from your caster level, rather than granting a direct bonus to it. Otherwise, it grants rather ridiculous bonuses to your check (+20 on the check at level 10 vs. an expected DC of 21, or +16 vs. DC 17 @8th for Dispelling Touch), which then drops off as the spell suddenly stops scaling.

Ethereal Jaunt: Without augmentation, can this affect creatures other than yourself? The range says yes, but the text says no. Also note that the original Etherealness (Ethereal Jaunt's multi-target brother) only affects willing creatures, not just any one touched.

Eyebite: The augmentation example is wrong. According to the table, spending 1 additional power point means that creatures with 5 HD or less are comatose, not 4 HD.

Forced Visions: I don't suppose this has any relation to my Weaponized Divination spells (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=10068.msg340230#msg340230), by any chance? Just wishful thinking on my part.

Form of the CREATURE: The ranges and spell listings of these spells indicate that they can be used on other subjects, but the spell descriptions specify you only.

Freedom of Movement: Along with several other spells, this spell's description switches between "you" and "the subject" somewhat disconcertingly.

Freezing Sphere: There is an erroneous comma in the augment. It should read "In addition, for every 2 additional spell points you spend," instead of "...spell points, you spend."

Gaseous Form: Can the augmented wind speed affect subjects other than yourself?

Globe of Invulnerability: There's a mismatch between the number of spell points blocked (5) and the indicated value of spell points that ignore the globe (listed as 6 immediately afterwards, but 7 later on).

Halt Undead: Undead are immune to mind-affecting effects. This should not have the mind-affecting descriptor.

Heroism: Note that Greater Heroism also grants temporary hit points equal to the caster level (maximum 20).

Identify: Note that Analyze Dweomer allows you to identify one thing per round as a free action after it has been cast, can detect and identify the auras present on creatures, and perfectly identifies cursed items (Identify only has a 1% chance/level of identifying the curse).

Light: See the note in Darkness about making it clear that you can only select one augment.

Meteor: At first, I thought this was just another Evocation blast spell. Then I saw the range and area. Definitely more of a plot spell than a tactical one, due to the variable radius. A rather literal campaign smasher, although by the level it comes up, it's probably more of a plot point than a campaign smasher. I still prefer the Locate City Bomb for style points, though.

Reality Veil: Refers to itself as Microcosm in the single target section.

Sleep: See the note on Daze about the wording of the augment.

Slow: The augment is somewhat redundant, since the spell affects one creature/cl by default.

Spell Turning: Is there any reason that the limited number of spell levels turned was removed? I'm not complaining, not until I've re-evaluated the spell as it is and decided if it's better with the changes.

[Ernir]

Yeah, I think both the Wizard and the Sorcerer could use some actual class features. Nothing big, just something utilitarian. Preferably something usable even when out of spell points.
At least in the Wizard's case, I'm thinking about implementing class features in the form of specialist ACFs.

I have a bit of a beef with random "one size fits all" features. =/
(Favored Soul energy resistances, I'm looking at you!)

This might interest you. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=11438)
Interesting, yes.

I'm not quite sure I get it, though. Do they use the Sorcerer/Wizard spell list? Shall we make all applicable assumptions about the terminology? How do you handle scaling and augments other than the DC augment?

I like what you've done so far. The changes to the actual spells seem well thought, from what I've seen so far. I especially like the clarifications in Anti-Magic Field. It's always fun to see healing back in Necromancy. Building Permanency into the spells is smart.

Overall, I have to say that this is great. I look forward to seeing what you do with the divine casters.
Thanks. Especially great since I know you really went through this. =D

Specific comments:

Skills

Concentration: The subheading should be "Gain Magical Focus," not "Gain Psionic Focus." Similarly, under "Check," there are several references to manifesting powers where it should be changed to casting spells.


Feats

Spellstaff Containment: Refers to "the crystal" being within 5 feet of you instead of the staff.


Spells

Aligned Protection: The first augment only accounts for the Protection from/Magic Circle against Evil version, preventing nongood creatures from entering, rather than those with an opposed alignment.

Animal's Movement: The example speed increases for Cheetah's Legs are true for a "multiplication" factor of 6, not 5.

Aura of Fire: Needs the "Spell Resistance: See text" line.

Chain Lightning: The cold option for this spell refers to the save DC to reduce the damage of a missile, rather than an arc.

Cone of Cold: The sonic option for this spell indicates that it deals 1 damage per die, rather than -1 damage per die (i.e.: 1 damage less than normal, as opposed to minimum damage).

Contingency: Not vital, but it would be nice to see this rewritten a little bit to clarify how it is augmented. Also note that both Psionic Contingency and the original Contingency have maximum spell/power levels equal to one third your CL/ML, not maximum SP/PP spent. I'm not sure if this is a mistranslation or part of your tweaks. There's also something slicker about using an immediate action to trigger it rather than a predetermined condition. That might also account for the nerf in the effectiveness of the companion spell.

Darkness: The augmentation options should be cleaned up. The fact that you can only augment it in one way (not both) should be made more explicit. Additionally, the indication of how you can spend a number of spell points to counter/dispel Light spells indicates that you can spend as little as 1 SP, despite the spell's cost being 3. Suggested fix:
Augment: You can augment the spell in one (but not both) of the following ways:
1. ...
2. ...
In addition, you may spend any number of additional spell points when casting this spell (subject to your normal limits). While they do not directly provide any additional benefits, they still contribute to determining what Light spells can be countered or dispelled.


Daze: I know that the psionic version has the exact same augment, but that wording always irks me. I think it should be "For every additional spell point you spend, the maximum hit dice of creatures this spell can affect increases by 1." Feel free to ignore me if you prefer.

Deadly Fight: Should probably have the Death descriptor.

Deadly Fog: Should say "You choose between acid, cold, electricity, or fire damage" instead of "...electricity, re damage." The acid option for this spell indicates that it deals 1 damage per die, rather than -1 damage per die (i.e.: 1 damage less than normal, as opposed to minimum damage).

Dispel Magic, Dispelling Touch: You may wish to change the augment to increasing the maximum bonus to your dispel check from your caster level, rather than granting a direct bonus to it. Otherwise, it grants rather ridiculous bonuses to your check (+20 on the check at level 10 vs. an expected DC of 21, or +16 vs. DC 17 @8th for Dispelling Touch), which then drops off as the spell suddenly stops scaling.

Ethereal Jaunt: Without augmentation, can this affect creatures other than yourself? The range says yes, but the text says no. Also note that the original Etherealness (Ethereal Jaunt's multi-target brother) only affects willing creatures, not just any one touched.

Eyebite: The augmentation example is wrong. According to the table, spending 1 additional power point means that creatures with 5 HD or less are comatose, not 4 HD.

Forced Visions: I don't suppose this has any relation to my Weaponized Divination spells (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=10068.msg340230#msg340230), by any chance? Just wishful thinking on my part.

Form of the CREATURE: The ranges and spell listings of these spells indicate that they can be used on other subjects, but the spell descriptions specify you only.

Freedom of Movement: Along with several other spells, this spell's description switches between "you" and "the subject" somewhat disconcertingly.

Freezing Sphere: There is an erroneous comma in the augment. It should read "In addition, for every 2 additional spell points you spend," instead of "...spell points, you spend."

Gaseous Form: Can the augmented wind speed affect subjects other than yourself?

Globe of Invulnerability: There's a mismatch between the number of spell points blocked (5) and the indicated value of spell points that ignore the globe (listed as 6 immediately afterwards, but 7 later on).

Halt Undead: Undead are immune to mind-affecting effects. This should not have the mind-affecting descriptor.

Heroism: Note that Greater Heroism also grants temporary hit points equal to the caster level (maximum 20).

Identify: Note that Analyze Dweomer allows you to identify one thing per round as a free action after it has been cast, can detect and identify the auras present on creatures, and perfectly identifies cursed items (Identify only has a 1% chance/level of identifying the curse).

Light: See the note in Darkness about making it clear that you can only select one augment.

Meteor: At first, I thought this was just another Evocation blast spell. Then I saw the range and area. Definitely more of a plot spell than a tactical one, due to the variable radius. A rather literal campaign smasher, although by the level it comes up, it's probably more of a plot point than a campaign smasher. I still prefer the Locate City Bomb for style points, though.

Reality Veil: Refers to itself as Microcosm in the single target section.

Sleep: See the note on Daze about the wording of the augment.

Slow: The augment is somewhat redundant, since the spell affects one creature/cl by default.

Spell Turning: Is there any reason that the limited number of spell levels turned was removed? I'm not complaining, not until I've re-evaluated the spell as it is and decided if it's better with the changes.
Woha! Thanks a million for the feedback. Exactly the kind of thing I was hoping for.
I'm not done dissecting it, here's what I have so far:

I fixed the skill and feat description.
The concentration description is especially embarrassing... looks like it was simply missing most of its update. :S

Spells:
Aligned Protection: Fixed.
Animal's Movement: Oops, right you are. Fixed.
Aura of Fire: Fixed.
Chain Lightning: Fixed.
Cone of Cold: Ligature error! (I used the "–" symbol in the input rather than the "-" symbol.) Fixed.
Contingency: Ah. Part tweak, part error. I did mean to have the limit on the companion spell be a function of its spell point cost (since that is a much more accurate representation of its power than it its level is), but I failed to update the formula. I have changed it (using a normal augmentation scheme) so that spells are available to be contingency'ed at the same levels they used to be.
Darkness: I intended to have both augmentation options accessible simultaneously, actually. But your change regarding the augment to overcome Light spells is much better. Changed to your wording.
Daze: Hmm, your wording is better. Changed.
Deadly Fright: I wanted it to be more like the Phantasmal Killer or the Rebuke line of spells from the SpC than a "real" Death effect. What it should be is a Compulsion. That should give it enough descriptors to be easy to defend against...

Will do D-S when I get back to my own 'puter.

Note I haven't updated the linked PDF yet.

[Garryl]

Happy to help.

I didn't check, but how closely did you copy the text from psionics about spending PP on a power? If I recall correctly, there's no limitation (other than you ML) for spending PP on a power, even if there aren't any augments to apply the excess towards. Is that also the case with your version? It's particularly relevant since spell DCs scale directly with the SP spent, although the Light/Darkness thing interacts with that aspect as well. If so, it might be worth mentioning explicitly, just to be clear.

[Ernir]

Beta 1.02 is up!

Deadly Fog: Should say "You choose between acid, cold, electricity, or fire damage" instead of "...electricity, re damage." The acid option for this spell indicates that it deals 1 damage per die, rather than -1 damage per die (i.e.: 1 damage less than normal, as opposed to minimum damage).

Dispel Magic, Dispelling Touch: You may wish to change the augment to increasing the maximum bonus to your dispel check from your caster level, rather than granting a direct bonus to it. Otherwise, it grants rather ridiculous bonuses to your check (+20 on the check at level 10 vs. an expected DC of 21, or +16 vs. DC 17 @8th for Dispelling Touch), which then drops off as the spell suddenly stops scaling.

Ethereal Jaunt: Without augmentation, can this affect creatures other than yourself? The range says yes, but the text says no. Also note that the original Etherealness (Ethereal Jaunt's multi-target brother) only affects willing creatures, not just any one touched.

Eyebite: The augmentation example is wrong. According to the table, spending 1 additional power point means that creatures with 5 HD or less are comatose, not 4 HD.

Forced Visions: I don't suppose this has any relation to my Weaponized Divination spells, by any chance? Just wishful thinking on my part.

Form of the CREATURE: The ranges and spell listings of these spells indicate that they can be used on other subjects, but the spell descriptions specify you only.

Freedom of Movement: Along with several other spells, this spell's description switches between "you" and "the subject" somewhat disconcertingly.

Freezing Sphere: There is an erroneous comma in the augment. It should read "In addition, for every 2 additional spell points you spend," instead of "...spell points, you spend."

Gaseous Form: Can the augmented wind speed affect subjects other than yourself?

Globe of Invulnerability: There's a mismatch between the number of spell points blocked (5) and the indicated value of spell points that ignore the globe (listed as 6 immediately afterwards, but 7 later on).

Halt Undead: Undead are immune to mind-affecting effects. This should not have the mind-affecting descriptor.

Heroism: Note that Greater Heroism also grants temporary hit points equal to the caster level (maximum 20).

Identify: Note that Analyze Dweomer allows you to identify one thing per round as a free action after it has been cast, can detect and identify the auras present on creatures, and perfectly identifies cursed items (Identify only has a 1% chance/level of identifying the curse).

Light: See the note in Darkness about making it clear that you can only select one augment.

Meteor: At first, I thought this was just another Evocation blast spell. Then I saw the range and area. Definitely more of a plot spell than a tactical one, due to the variable radius. A rather literal campaign smasher, although by the level it comes up, it's probably more of a plot point than a campaign smasher. I still prefer the Locate City Bomb for style points, though.

Reality Veil: Refers to itself as Microcosm in the single target section.

Sleep: See the note on Daze about the wording of the augment.

Slow: The augment is somewhat redundant, since the spell affects one creature/cl by default.

Spell Turning: Is there any reason that the limited number of spell levels turned was removed? I'm not complaining, not until I've re-evaluated the spell as it is and decided if it's better with the changes.
And continuing!
Deadly Fog: Fixed.
Dispel Magic, Dispelling Touch: Ah. This is the way it is just because that's how Dispel Psionics (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/dispelPsionics.htm) works. Any changes from that power were unintentional.
My original version actually made it a bit more like Dispel Magic, but the only feedback I got on that was that Dispel Psionics is just fine as it is. :S
Ethereal Jaunt: Oops. Sloppy combining of the two spells on my part. Text changed to uniformly refer to a subject.
Also, I added a "will negates" line. Makes it a bit more like Plane Shift, which I happen to think is hilarious.
Eyebite: Fixed.
Forced Visions: Heh. No connection, I'm afraid, I don't frequent the BG forums. :smalltongue:
Form of the X: Oh, damn. This didn't even occur to me. Went through the spells, changed all the many, many references to "you". In other words, fixed.
Freedom of Movement: English pronouns will be the death of me. Fixed.
Freezing Sphere: Fixed.
Gaseous Form: Yes it can. Fixed.
Globe of Invulnerability: Fixed.
Halt Undead: Changed it.
Heroism: Good point. Added the temporary hit points back to the augment.
Identify: Hmm, yes, there needs to be a curse detection clause on the spell, since the old entry on cursed items can't reference Analyze Dweomer any more. Added it to the 10SP augment for now, although I probably should split it up...
As for the other functions of Analyze Dweomer, I think this augment and the new Detect Magic should more or less cover it.
Light: Added a similar clause.
Meteor: I've been getting this so often that I think I'll have to budge. As much as I like the idea of a 1d6-mile radius burst Weapon of Doom, I guess playability has to take precedence here. Nerfed down to a 1-mile radius burst.
Reality Veil: Guess I'm busted. :smalltongue:
Fixed.
Sleep: Changed.
Slow: Ah, oops. This wasn't supposed to auto-scale with respect to number of creatures. Fixed.
Spell Turning: The level limit is gone because I was trying to make it more like Reddopsi (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/reddopsi.htm).
The only thing I really don't want to lose is the resonating field. I think it's hilarious. xD

Again, thanks a bunch for the feedback, it really helped.

Happy to help.

I didn't check, but how closely did you copy the text from psionics about spending PP on a power? If I recall correctly, there's no limitation (other than you ML) for spending PP on a power, even if there aren't any augments to apply the excess towards. Is that also the case with your version? It's particularly relevant since spell DCs scale directly with the SP spent, although the Light/Darkness thing interacts with that aspect as well. If so, it might be worth mentioning explicitly, just to be clear.

Interestingly enough, I didn't copy that very closely. Psionics don't allow you to spend more PP on a power than the base cost, unless an augment is present, as far as I can tell.


All powers have a Power Points line, indicating the power’s cost.

The psionic character class tables show how many power points a character has access to each day, depending on level.

A power’s cost is determined by its level, as shown below. Every power’s cost is noted in its description for ease of reference.

Power Point Limit
Some powers allow you to spend more than their base cost to achieve an improved effect, or augment the power. The maximum number of points you can spend on a power (for any reason) is equal to your manifester level.
I explicitly allowed it.

All spells have a Spell Points line, indicating the spell's cost. This is the minimum number of spell points that must be paid in order to cast the spell.

The spellcasting character class tables show how many spell points a character has access to each day, depending on level.

A spell's cost is determined by its level, as shown on table 1. Every spell's cost is noted in its description for ease of reference.

Spell Point Limit
The spell point cost mentioned in each spell's description is the minimum number of spell points needed to cast the spell. You can, if you wish, spend more than this minimum number on a spell, usually to increase the spell's saving throw DC, or to use an augment the spell may have. The maximum number of points you can spend on a spell (for any reason) is equal to your caster level (the fundamental rule of magic).

[Ernir]

The Paladin class is up! I was a bit more liberal when it came to creating brand new spells for the Paladin list than for the Sorcerer/Wizard list. That's simply because the Paladin list required a lot more help.
For the many out there that I know won't ever download the document - the skinny of it is that the Paladin is structured the way the Psychic Warrior is.

The Cleric is still on its way. That one is going to be, well, not quite as difficult as doing the Wizard in the first place, but it's still a bit huge. The Paladin was a stepping stone.
I am doing that one Ardent-style. A Cleric's spell list is going to be defined by the domains he has access to.

[Solaris]

I must admit, this was a project I'd been planning on doing for quite some time. I'm rather glad to have found someone else had already done the legwork. This reworking will be hitting my campaign as soon as my caster players have had time to digest it.

[Ernir]

I must admit, this was a project I'd been planning on doing for quite some time. I'm rather glad to have found someone else had already done the legwork.
Heh. Yeah, the "replace wizards with psions" thought isn't exactly mine alone. :smalltongue:

This reworking will be hitting my campaign as soon as my caster players have had time to digest it.
Awesome to hear! Please let me know how it goes.

[Draz74]

The Cleric is still on its way. ...
I am doing that one Ardent-style. A Cleric's spell list is going to be defined by the domains he has access to.

Hmmmm. I'm undecided about which I like better: Ardent-style or Spontaneous Variant Cleric style. The latter makes the Cleric more able to fill the generic healbot role, if a party needs it; while still tying it strongly to its domains for flavor.

Ardent-style is good too, though.

That reminds me of one comment I have been sitting on about the Wizard, though: I don't like the way each specialist-only list has exactly one spell at each level. It makes me feel like you're picking specialist-only spells in order to match that standard, rather than picking them for flavor or balance reasons. And it's an arbitrary standard -- the Psion Discipline lists prove that there's nothing wrong with sometimes having more or fewer than one option at each level. And I think Psion Discipline Lists are, generally, better-designed than Cleric Domain lists because of this flexibility.

[Ernir]

There have been two things about the spell descriptions I have been wondering about changing for some time. I'd appreciate any feedback.

One is removing the "Spell Points" line from the spell descriptions. Technically it is a complete waste of space, as the relationship between a spell's base SP cost has a 1-1 relationship with the spell's level. In other words, the information there is redundant with table 1: Spell Points by Spell Level.
And I have Spell Point lines like "Spell Points: Chaos 13, Evil 13, Good 13, Law 13, Paladin 11". This is ugly. :smallsigh:

The second (completely unrelated, and bothers me less) is adding a line about how obvious the effects of a spell are as they relate to noticing its effects. It's pretty obvious when someone is under the effects of an Alter Size spell, but what about Moment of Prescience? I think this may be important enough to warrant mechanical definition.

Hmmmm. I'm undecided about which I like better: Ardent-style or Spontaneous Variant Cleric style. The latter makes the Cleric more able to fill the generic healbot role, if a party needs it; while still tying it strongly to its domains for flavor.

Ardent-style is good too, though.
The spontaneous Cleric/Druid way isn't bad. I hadn't thought of it myself. Interesting.

In any case, I want to drastically increase the impact domain selection has on the Cleric. Clerics of the god of healing and love sharing 90% of its spell list with a Cleric of the god of skewering infants has always bugged me.
And I definitely want it to be possible to build a Cleric that can't properly cure people. :smalltongue:

Perhaps, in the end, the decision might just depend on how well it goes to divide the Cleric spell list down on to the domains...

That reminds me of one comment I have been sitting on about the Wizard, though: I don't like the way each specialist-only list has exactly one spell at each level. It makes me feel like you're picking specialist-only spells in order to match that standard, rather than picking them for flavor or balance reasons. And it's an arbitrary standard -- the Psion Discipline lists prove that there's nothing wrong with sometimes having more or fewer than one option at each level. And I think Psion Discipline Lists are, generally, better-designed than Cleric Domain lists because of this flexibility.

You'll notice that this trend drops off as I reached the higher levels of spells. But only slightly.

I wasn't really trying to make one specialist only spell of every level, even if it did end up more or less like that. My thought process was more like this:

Specialist only spells should be fairly iconic for the archetype.
Most levels of spells should have a specialist only spell for that level.
Specialist only spells should be good spells.
Spells that are good, but constitute a "basic need" for the game are not specialist only spells. (Hence, Dispel Magic is not an Abjurer-only spell, even if it is probably the best 3rd level abjuration spell, and fairly iconic for the school. Flight is a notable exception, but that is rather easily available through items.)

This ended up being more or less 1 specialist only spell per school per spell level. But I wasn't consciously steering towards it, at least.


But, now, are there any particular spells you think should/shouldn't be specialist only spells?:smalltongue:

[Draz74]

Btw, I also mourn the loss of cantrips in general.

Also, the spell lists should definitely have the little [A] symbol to indicate whether spells are augmentable. Unless all spells are augmentable.


In any case, I want to drastically increase the impact domain selection has on the Cleric. Clerics of the god of healing and love sharing 90% of its spell list with a Cleric of the god of skewering infants has always bugged me.
And I definitely want it to be possible to build a Cleric that can't properly cure people. :smalltongue:
100% agreed on both points.


But, now, are there any particular spells you think should/shouldn't be specialist only spells?:smalltongue:

Sigh. Congratulations, you've convinced me to procrastinate working on my homework even longer. :smalltongue:

Commentary on spell lists, both in terms of specialist-only spells and otherwise:

Level 1
I don't really like the game design principles behind Aligned Protection ... but I suppose it's kind of sacred cow territory, since you're not trying to fix everything about D&D ...

Open/Close always seemed like a really weak ability to me, even as a cantrip. Perhaps it should be absorbed into Mage Hand (which should still exist)? Either way, I struggle to understand why it would really be in Abjuration. I also wouldn't mind seeing both spells absorbed into Unseen Servant.

Shield struggles to see any use even when it's not specialist-only. Perhaps it should be a general spell, while Mage Armor (with its superior duration) should be Abjurer-only?

Summon Monster ... If you've beefed up summons to actually be combat-worthy, a la Astral Construct, then I agree with this power being specialist-only. However, I do think there should be a way for more normal wizards to summon battle-unworthy critters for various utilitarian tasks. Also, I might consider bumping the base version of this spell up to Level 2. It's just not something I picture brand-new casters being able to do. Besides, it's kind of weak at very low levels anyway due to duration.

Mount: does the speed boost augment overlap with the other augments, or do you have to spend separate SP on it?

Fog: could potentially be specialist-only.

Comprehend Languages: doesn't strike me as something that should be specialist-only. Honestly, for a specialist-only Level 1 Divination, I might just copy the mechanics of Precognition wholesale. Which might obviate the need for True Strike to exist, even? Eh, maybe not.

Or you could move Mental Link to Divination, and make it specialist-only. Like Mindlink, which is one of the psionic powers I actually consider picking up using Hidden Talent.

Light: is this worthy of existing when it's not a cantrip? Especially since your rewrite of Prestidigitation can create light?

Ray of Enfeeblement: potentially worthy of specialist-only. It honestly doesn't bother me if low-level non-Necromancer wizards have very few necromantic options.


Level 2
Resistance: I find it odd for this to be Level 2. Also, the precedent from (splatbook) 3e seems to indicate that this should scale to an additional +1 bonus for every 2 SP of augmentation.

Matter Creation: Having this not be Level 1 makes me sad.

Fireball: I see this is supposed to follow the pre-CPsi mechanics of Energy Missile, essentially? (Except it does do friendly fire.) Interesting -- that definitely makes it iconic and worthy of specialist-only. However, it makes me sad if non-specialists have no reasonable options for throwing around fire and lightning at a distance greater than touch. (Or am I missing one?) I can see why you made Scorching Ray specialist-only, but maybe it shouldn't be ...

Mirror Image is a staple of powergaming Batman wizards. I wouldn't mind it being specialist-only.

Invisibility ... very iconic. I'm torn on this one's specialist-status.

Phantom Trap: does anyone use this? Ever?


OK, that's all the level-by-level commentary I have patience for at the moment.

I will note, though, that at higher levels, I feel like a lot of the specialist-only spells aren't really all that iconic. Like, they're specialized enough that I don't see why anyone else would ever mind not having them on their list. Like Gentle Repose, or Nondetection. (Caveat: maybe you've made Nondetection much more powerful. Haven't read everything yet.)

Also: Enervation not specialist-only? :smallconfused:

[Cardea]

So I finally got my way through this.

I love you for this and you deserve five of something that people really want that shows high status to others.

[Ernir]

Btw, I also mourn the loss of cantrips in general.
Psionics doesn't have them, or really any framework to support them. Partial spell points? 1st level spells are just the bottom, as-is. =/

The new Prestidigitation swallowed a few of them, though, and I gave that one for free to all Wizards.

Also, the spell lists should definitely have the little [A] symbol to indicate whether spells are augmentable. Unless all spells are augmentable.
There is at least always the "null augment", meaning that it's always possible to spend more points on a spell in order to increase its save DC. Whether a spell also has a "new use" kind of augment isn't something I consider relevant enough to have in the spell listing, especially since you would usually have to read the full spell description anyway in order to know what the original use is.

Sigh. Congratulations, you've convinced me to procrastinate working on my homework even longer. :smalltongue:
I live to please! :smallcool:


Commentary on spell lists, both in terms of specialist-only spells and otherwise:

Level 1
I don't really like the game design principles behind Aligned Protection ... but I suppose it's kind of sacred cow territory, since you're not trying to fix everything about D&D ...

Open/Close always seemed like a really weak ability to me, even as a cantrip. Perhaps it should be absorbed into Mage Hand (which should still exist)? Either way, I struggle to understand why it would really be in Abjuration. I also wouldn't mind seeing both spells absorbed into Unseen Servant.

Shield struggles to see any use even when it's not specialist-only. Perhaps it should be a general spell, while Mage Armor (with its superior duration) should be Abjurer-only?

Summon Monster ... If you've beefed up summons to actually be combat-worthy, a la Astral Construct, then I agree with this power being specialist-only. However, I do think there should be a way for more normal wizards to summon battle-unworthy critters for various utilitarian tasks. Also, I might consider bumping the base version of this spell up to Level 2. It's just not something I picture brand-new casters being able to do. Besides, it's kind of weak at very low levels anyway due to duration.

Mount: does the speed boost augment overlap with the other augments, or do you have to spend separate SP on it?

Fog: could potentially be specialist-only.

Comprehend Languages: doesn't strike me as something that should be specialist-only. Honestly, for a specialist-only Level 1 Divination, I might just copy the mechanics of Precognition wholesale. Which might obviate the need for True Strike to exist, even? Eh, maybe not.

Or you could move Mental Link to Divination, and make it specialist-only. Like Mindlink, which is one of the psionic powers I actually consider picking up using Hidden Talent.

Light: is this worthy of existing when it's not a cantrip? Especially since your rewrite of Prestidigitation can create light?

Ray of Enfeeblement: potentially worthy of specialist-only. It honestly doesn't bother me if low-level non-Necromancer wizards have very few necromantic options.

Aligned Protection:Can't say the alignment system is my favourite part of 3.5 either. But it's there, and extracting it from the game is indeed beyond the scope of the project.
Open/Close: Open/Close had Arcane Lock and Knock merged into it in the form of augments, which makes it a lot more worthy of a Spell Known, I think. Mage Hand was fully merged into Prestidigitation.
Putting the effect into Unseen Servant could have been a way to do it, but that's not what I did, and I'm not convinced enough it's better for me to make the changes at this point. :smalltongue:
As for it being an abjuration... err... looks like I had it inherit from Arcane Lock, there. Do you think it should be a Transmutation or something?
Shield/Mage Armor: Good point, there. Switching the specialist-only status of those two around.
Summon Monster: Summon Monster works like Astral Construct. Summoned Monsters are a bit weaker defensively and a bit stronger offensively, but I'd definitely put these on equal footing.
I could push it into being a higher level spell, but that would mean re-doing the scaling on it, and I'm not sure there's an actual benefit to it.
Mount: Augments are always paid for separately. If there are secondary benefits to augmenting, they are explained after the actual augmentation list. See Fear for an example.
Fog: I've been thinking the same thing ever since I wrote it. This being the first thought on the issue I've had from someone other than me, consider it changed. :smalltongue:
Comprehend Languages/Precognition/True Strike/Mindlink/Mental Link: Lots'o thoughts here. I'll give it another look. Mental Link was floating between Divination and Enchantment for a while in the first alpha, and I was thinking about including Precognition. What made the decision is that Divination 1 was already a fat level, but Enchantment wasn't very big at all. And I was having a hard time justifying "stealing" a psionic power to pad a level that had lots of spells in it already.
Light: It's not a very powerful spell, maybe. I just added (a possibly improved) Flare to it, it has Daylight and Eternal Flame in it... well, it's utility I think needs to exist.
Ray of Enfeeblement: I'm not sure, I've never thought it quite lived up to the "one of the best 1st level spells!" status some people want to give it. And using a RoEnfeeblement isn't a huge necromantic statement in my eyes anyway.

Level 2
Resistance: I find it odd for this to be Level 2. Also, the precedent from (splatbook) 3e seems to indicate that this should scale to an additional +1 bonus for every 2 SP of augmentation.

Matter Creation: Having this not be Level 1 makes me sad.

Fireball: I see this is supposed to follow the pre-CPsi mechanics of Energy Missile, essentially? (Except it does do friendly fire.) Interesting -- that definitely makes it iconic and worthy of specialist-only. However, it makes me sad if non-specialists have no reasonable options for throwing around fire and lightning at a distance greater than touch. (Or am I missing one?) I can see why you made Scorching Ray specialist-only, but maybe it shouldn't be ...

Mirror Image is a staple of powergaming Batman wizards. I wouldn't mind it being specialist-only.

Invisibility ... very iconic. I'm torn on this one's specialist-status.

Phantom Trap: does anyone use this? Ever?


OK, that's all the level-by-level commentary I have patience for at the moment.
Resistance: Frankly, I think the Superior Resistance spell in the SpC is too good. As is, the scaling on the spell is set to fully duplicate Superior Resistance (+6 resistance on saving throws, 24 hour duration) at level 20. I think this is more in line with the Cloak of Resistance. Should it be doing better?
Matter Creation: The point was more to make the Shapers feel less robbed. :smalltongue:
Fireball: This one went through several revisions before it came to the point where it is now (originally, it simply WAS CPsi Energy Missile). I decided that "hard to dodge" should be something that stands out about it, so that's the way it scales now. Another idea I toyed with was making it knock people prone on a failed save, but I thought that was changing it too much.
I thought about making some *blamf*-type spell for the general list. Thing is that those spells are just really the only thing the Evoker has uniquely going for him at this point, and I kind of feel for him. =/
At this point, I think it's OK that a Wizard who wants to blow stuff up properly either spends a feat on Expanded Knowledge or specializes in Evocation.
Mirror Image: Good point, especially with the Augment. Changed.
Invisibility: That one's specialist only purely for reasons of it being so damned useful.
Phantom Trap: I don't think so. It's crap. And I have no idea what to do with it. :smallfrown:


I will note, though, that at higher levels, I feel like a lot of the specialist-only spells aren't really all that iconic. Like, they're specialized enough that I don't see why anyone else would ever mind not having them on their list. Like Gentle Repose, or Nondetection. (Caveat: maybe you've made Nondetection much more powerful. Haven't read everything yet.)

Also: Enervation not specialist-only? :smallconfused:
Gentle Repose had Clone merged into it, which makes it quite a lot bigger. :smalltongue:
Nondetection is now a bit more reliable with the Augment, but otherwise no, not significantly more powerful. Dispel Magic may be the more known Abjuration of the level, but it's such a basic need that I couldn't justify it. =/

Problem with things being iconic is that not everyone has the same idea. The specialist only spells might just be my favourite spells. :smallredface:
Nothing sticks out to me as particularly horrible right now without having a particular name to look for. But no wonder, it's text I wrote myself, so of course I won't ever see the errors until they are pointed out. :smalltongue:

Hmm, you're probably right, Enervation could do with being specialist only. Changed.

So I finally got my way through this.

I love you for this and you deserve five of something that people really want that shows high status to others.
Great to hear it! :smallsmile:

[Veyr]

Cantrips could be cast for the low(?) cost of expending Focus. Maybe you can metamagic them with the same expenditure, so they're not suddenly harder than everything else to metamagic.

[Jallorn]

Cantrips could be cast for the low(?) cost of expending Focus. Maybe you can metamagic them with the same expenditure, so they're not suddenly harder than everything else to metamagic.

Or just make them at-wills like Pathfinder did.

[Ernir]

Cantrips could be cast for the low(?) cost of expending Focus. Maybe you can metamagic them with the same expenditure, so they're not suddenly harder than everything else to metamagic.
Or just make them at-wills like Pathfinder did.

The ideas have merit.

How about just a class feature called "Cantrips" that says "While you are magically focused, you may do X, Y, and Z"?

[Veyr]

That also works. There're not many cantrips I'd be worried about allowing for that. Mostly Launch Bolt shenanigans.

[Qwertystop]

That also works. There're not many cantrips I'd be worried about allowing for that. Mostly Launch Bolt shenanigans.

What, you're worried about what is essentially a free, non-magical, non-masterwork light crossbow? Not much to worry about.

[Veyr]

Launch Bolt does not have a size limitation. Colossal Bolts do quite a bit more damage.

[Qwertystop]

Launch Bolt does not have a size limitation. Colossal Bolts do quite a bit more damage.

Technically, isn't the damage done by a Bolt defined by the crossbow used? And isn't the damage based on a crossbow usable by the caster?

EDIT: Anyway, you said you were fixing the biggest broken exploits. Rephrase it as I said above (based on what crossbow the caster could use if they had a crossbow) and all it does is save you the cost of a crossbow.

[Sfere]

3.0 Psionics had cantrips- called "talents". They could be manifested for free level + 3 times per day, and for 1 pp thereafter.

[Ernir]

That also works. There're not many cantrips I'd be worried about allowing for that. Mostly Launch Bolt shenanigans.
Technically, isn't the damage done by a Bolt defined by the crossbow used? And isn't the damage based on a crossbow usable by the caster?

EDIT: Anyway, you said you were fixing the biggest broken exploits. Rephrase it as I said above (based on what crossbow the caster could use if they had a crossbow) and all it does is save you the cost of a crossbow.
I'm not particularly worried about one oddly written non-OGL cantrip is going to do. I'm still fuzzy on what exactly I can and can't do with the splatbook spells, so they aren't about to be included in the immediate future.


3.0 Psionics had cantrips- called "talents". They could be manifested for free level + 3 times per day, and for 1 pp thereafter.
Could work too.



I haven't done anything with the cantrips/orisons yet, but in celebration of my first exam being tomorrow, I did upload a new version. This includes
The chassis of the Cleric class I am working with, although not any of the domains. The Assassin PrC. A class feature for the Sorcerer.

[acid_ninja]

This is really excellent work. I've long felt that Vancian magic was the biggest weeakness in D and D and that the psionics mechanics were the way to go. I've been toying around with just re-fluffed psionics instead of magic (and I actually kind of like some of the limitations that imposes, especially for healing) but the problem with that is losing a big chunk of splatbook support. You've gone and solved that problem.

I also really like what you've done with the pally and I can see doing something similar with the druid (giving them x number of free uses of the form of X spells instead of wild shape, etc). I would kind of like to see an arcane version of the paladin, maybe based on the Duskblade. More of an offensive spell list and class-only feats that mimic spell channeling and casting in armor might be the main things, maybe along with something like the arcane strike feat. I know you're probably plenty busy working so its just a thought.

Great job.

[Quellian-dyrae]

Very, very good. I read most of the document (skimmed a few of the spells that I pretty much never use), and was particularly impressed with the rebalancing. I think you hit most if not all of the classic exploits while still leaving the spells quite useful, and the merging made lots of otherwise nigh-worthless spells actually viable choices (Hold Portal leaping to mind).

The only spells I can think of that seemed a little off in terms of power were Stoneskin, Precognition, and - in a sense - Meteor. Stoneskin I think could be reduced to one minute per level, since it's no longer ablative. Precognition I think needs a little more behind it to be worth its level, some sort of incentive to actually stick to the action stated so you can prepare tactics accordingly without the opponent just saying never mind. Meteor is truly awesome, well worth its spell level, but an option to call down a smaller meteor more useful to a typical D&D-scale battle would probably be good. As-is, it's great for annihilating armies, but unwieldy for fighting, say, dragons.

There are a few design choices I don't personally agree with (some of the Evil descriptors; Fog, Invisibility, Fly, and Dimension Door as specialist only; maybe a couple changes that weren't made), but that's more playstyle differences than anything. And I'm sure my dislike to the nerf to the "Greater Teleport" effect is because teleportation is my personal favorite supernatural ability.

In terms of editing, Heal and Harm have augments that say "if you spend 6 additional creatures" rather than spell points. And Cure Minor Wounds is down in the T's.

And finally, a couple suggestions for things that were mentioned in the thread:

For Rope Trick (and Mage's Mansion, I suppose), increasing the casting time to one hour would probably be sufficient to prevent the "I can rest wherever and whenever I want" exploit, while still leaving them fulfilling their primary purpose of giving you a safe place to rest.

For generalist wizards, what if they could select specialist spells, but no more than one from each school and/or one for each spell level?

Anyway, I think that's enough out of me. Again, great job!

[Ernir]

For those of you who are really really interested, I have begun uploading the very latest edition of the document here (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/19444168/VancianToPsionicsBleedingEdge.pdf). This is the document as it looks like the last time I hit the "compile" button on my end - formatting errors, placeholders, and bad ideas that will never make it to an actual release included.


This is really excellent work. I've long felt that Vancian magic was the biggest weeakness in D and D and that the psionics mechanics were the way to go. I've been toying around with just re-fluffed psionics instead of magic (and I actually kind of like some of the limitations that imposes, especially for healing) but the problem with that is losing a big chunk of splatbook support. You've gone and solved that problem.
Whee!

You're still missing thousands of spells worth of splatbook material, but at least this provides a working core.

I also really like what you've done with the pally and I can see doing something similar with the druid (giving them x number of free uses of the form of X spells instead of wild shape, etc).
Right now, the Druid is just a subheading under the Cleric, but one of the Animal domain granted powers will be to extend the duration of the Form of the [Animal] spells.

I would kind of like to see an arcane version of the paladin, maybe based on the Duskblade. More of an offensive spell list and class-only feats that mimic spell channeling and casting in armor might be the main things, maybe along with something like the arcane strike feat. I know you're probably plenty busy working so its just a thought.

Great job.I'm going to finish converting the core classes before I start adding my own... but it so happens that the first base class I want to do myself is an arcane knight type. Odd coincidence. :smalltongue:

I think I might give the Eldritch Knight channeling. And convert Deep Crystal weapons. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/items/specialMaterials.htm) I actually have the Psionic Weapon (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicFeats.htm#psionicWeapon) feats and its relatives converted. They are currently commented out in the source code due to me thinking that I was stealing what should perhaps stay a Psionic trick. Might add them back in at some point.

Casting in armor is actually not a problem under these mechanics (an inheritance from Psionics). The only problem is that the old primary arcane casters (Sorcerer and Wizard) aren't proficient with the things.

Very, very good. I read most of the document (skimmed a few of the spells that I pretty much never use), and was particularly impressed with the rebalancing. I think you hit most if not all of the classic exploits while still leaving the spells quite useful, and the merging made lots of otherwise nigh-worthless spells actually viable choices (Hold Portal leaping to mind).
Yay!

Contrary to what I sent out to do, this might have taken up more time than any other part of the project...

The only spells I can think of that seemed a little off in terms of power were Stoneskin, Precognition, and - in a sense - Meteor. Stoneskin I think could be reduced to one minute per level, since it's no longer ablative. Precognition I think needs a little more behind it to be worth its level, some sort of incentive to actually stick to the action stated so you can prepare tactics accordingly without the opponent just saying never mind. Meteor is truly awesome, well worth its spell level, but an option to call down a smaller meteor more useful to a typical D&D-scale battle would probably be good. As-is, it's great for annihilating armies, but unwieldy for fighting, say, dragons.
Stoneskin... ablative? Sorry, I think you may have broken my English vocabulary here. :smallredface:

Yeah, Precognition was something I threw together to fill a level. It relies on Gentleman's Agreement and DM fiat way more than I think a spell should, really. I'll probably just end up ditching it once I come up with/find something better.

Mini-meteors are probably a good idea.
The more I think about it, Meteor as-is might be better as an Epic spell or something. :smallfrown:

There are a few design choices I don't personally agree with (some of the Evil descriptors; Fog, Invisibility, Fly, and Dimension Door as specialist only; maybe a couple changes that weren't made), but that's more playstyle differences than anything. And I'm sure my dislike to the nerf to the "Greater Teleport" effect is because teleportation is my personal favorite supernatural ability.
Heh. Yeah, it's not quite Teleport Without Error any more. That might be my preference shining through, because some of my favourite moments as a DM have been when I announce that the party has safely Teleported into a duck pond. xD

As for the specialist-only spells... which spells should be specialist-only isn't exactly a hard science. I only really had my own preference to go with, but if whatever table this could hypothetically be played at thinks it should be different, this should be fairly easy to nudge around without breaking everything to pieces.

In terms of editing, Heal and Harm have augments that say "if you spend 6 additional creatures" rather than spell points. And Cure Minor Wounds is down in the T's.
Additional creatures. Wow, that's a glorious one. xD

Both fixed.

And finally, a couple suggestions for things that were mentioned in the thread:

For Rope Trick (and Mage's Mansion, I suppose), increasing the casting time to one hour would probably be sufficient to prevent the "I can rest wherever and whenever I want" exploit, while still leaving them fulfilling their primary purpose of giving you a safe place to rest.

For generalist wizards, what if they could select specialist spells, but no more than one from each school and/or one for each spell level?
I recently saw that Pathfinder added a clause that says "The rope cannot be removed or hidden.", which really makes a lot of difference IMO. That + a casting time increase makes this a lot less powerful. It'd turn into a "protection from random nightly encounters" spell, but it'd be pretty damn useless in a dungeon.

Good idea on the generalist - too bad I already used it for the Sorcerer. =/

Anyway, I think that's enough out of me. Again, great job!
Thanks!

[Draz74]

Matter Creation: The point was more to make the Shapers feel less robbed. :smalltongue:

Ah. A noble cause ... somehow I was under the assumption that this system was intended to be used in a setting that didn't have psionicists anymore.

I still might prefer switching this with Summon Monster. Fixing the scaling on Summon Monster wouldn't be too hard -- just eliminate the lowest-order beasties from the equation. But hey, that's a change that's easy enough to just make myself if I ever DM 3.5e again.

EDIT: Hmmm, I probably should be commenting over on Competitor Games instead of here ... just because that Forum's been so sadly dead lately. :smallfrown:

[Amechra]

NEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDS MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORE BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARD

That said, I like it. I'm thinking of using this next game I run.

[Ernir]

@Draz (http://forum.faxcelestis.net/viewtopic.php?p=1426#p1426) :smalltongue:

NEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDS MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORE BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARD

That said, I like it. I'm thinking of using this next game I run.

It's coming! Soon(TM)

And thanks. Please let me know how it goes, if it happens.

[Ernir]

You didn't think I let this die, did you?

Beta 1.05 is up. (http://www3.hi.is/~eth31/ConversionProject/VancianToPsionicsBeta105.pdf) Includes the first five domains I've completed, and a Dragon Disciple class.

The alignment domains are really similar to another when it comes to spells. This isn't typical for what the domains will be like, but them being similar is the reason they were the easiest ones to spit out first. :smalltongue:

[acid_ninja]

Glad to see this is still going. Really great work. I'm thinking about adapting it for pathfinder. Should actually be a pretty simple job - the spell lists are pretty much core and there are only a few spell progressions. There are psionic classes for PF and I'm thinking I could use the psywar progression for the half casters - bards, magi and inquisitors. I think I would actually leave alchemists as-is since their flavor is the only one that really justifies a vancian mechanic.

[Ernir]

Glad to see this is still going. Really great work.
Thanks!

I'm thinking about adapting it for pathfinder. Should actually be a pretty simple job - the spell lists are pretty much core and there are only a few spell progressions. There are psionic classes for PF and I'm thinking I could use the psywar progression for the half casters - bards, magi and inquisitors. I think I would actually leave alchemists as-is since their flavor is the only one that really justifies a vancian mechanic.Cool. Not sure how much there is to be done, aside from the class skill lists. Haven't really looked much at Pathfinder since the beta. Let me know how it goes! :smalltongue:

If you want to tweak the SP progressions, right now I'm using the following:
Wizard and Cleric SP: roundup((level^2+level+1)*(3/4))
Sorcerer SP: rounddown(level^2+level+1)
Paladin SP: Whatever the psychic warrior has.
Bard (not yet out there) SP: rounddown((level^2)/2)

Let me know if you want the source code for the document.

[NineThePuma]

I'm going to be abducting this for my setting (giving you proper credit, of course) when I finally get it running and some play test, I'll give you a line.

((Of course, I'm waiting excitedly for the Ranger/Druid; the Cleric is getting something closer to Binding.))

[acid_ninja]

Not sure what ^ means in math. Sorry, I'm an English teacher:smallamused:

[NineThePuma]

It's the sign for an exponent. level2 would be the way you're familiar with it from high school, I bet.

[acid_ninja]

That I get. Thanks:smallcool:

[DragonOfUndeath]

Subscribed.
This looks like an awesome system, I am so playing a Wizard next game I play
*Lurks and reads pdf*

EDIT: Just looked at the Archmage Prestige Class, is it possible to not use a High Arcana to keep the fueling Spell Points?
So if V had Mastery of Counterspelling but knew he would not be facing any Casters that day, would he be able to lose access to the ability for 1 day and regain 13SP?

[Ernir]

I'm going to be abducting this for my setting (giving you proper credit, of course) when I finally get it running and some play test, I'll give you a line.
Good to hear. I only have one report of this being actually used so far, so I'm very eager for more. :smalltongue:

((Of course, I'm waiting excitedly for the Ranger/Druid; the Cleric is getting something closer to Binding.))
The Druid is currently just a subheading under the Cleric class, but yeah, the domains that will make up its spell list and class features aren't out yet.

The Ranger is going to be last of the core classes to get its overhaul, but you can expect something similar to what I did with the Paladin.
Fortunately, the Ranger should be easy once I'm done with the Druid spells.

Subscribed.
This looks like an awesome system, I am so playing a Wizard next game I play
*Lurks and reads pdf*
Thanks!

EDIT: Just looked at the Archmage Prestige Class, is it possible to not use a High Arcana to keep the fueling Spell Points?
So if V had Mastery of Counterspelling but knew he would not be facing any Casters that day, would he be able to lose access to the ability for 1 day and regain 13SP?
No, that was not the intent. It says the Spell Points are permanently eliminated.

[DragonOfUndeath]

No, that was not the intent. It says the Spell Points are permanently eliminated.

That sucks then, losing SP reduces versatility which a PrC should be doing the opposite of, sure some of the abilities are cool or good for a specific build but I don't see it being taken past lvl2-3 (Mastery of Elements for use against Immune Enemies, Arcane Reach for some cool Touch Spells, Spell Power for an odd-numbered casting stat) and certainly not all 5 levels simply from the SP cost.

[Draz74]

That sucks then, losing SP reduces versatility which a PrC should be doing the opposite of,

Au contraire, PrCs are precisely supposed to reduce versatility. They're supposed to specialize a character more definitely into a specific niche.

[Garryl]

The psionic style archmage is just following the precedent set by the standard archmage, which also requires you to permanently lose spell slots when you gain High Arcana abilities.

[Jallorn]

That sucks then, losing SP reduces versatility which a PrC should be doing the opposite of, sure some of the abilities are cool or good for a specific build but I don't see it being taken past lvl2-3 (Mastery of Elements for use against Immune Enemies, Arcane Reach for some cool Touch Spells, Spell Power for an odd-numbered casting stat) and certainly not all 5 levels simply from the SP cost.


Au contraire, PrCs are precisely supposed to reduce versatility. They're supposed to specialize a character more definitely into a specific niche.

I partially disagree with both of you. Yes, a PRC is supposed to improve specialization, no it shouldn't damage generalization, however, that only means that a Class x/PRC y should have the generalized abilities of Class x+~1/2 Class y, because they trade some of that new generalization for specialization. Therefore, the trade off for the Archmage is viable, given that it gains additional casting as well as abilities, the cost of those abilities is absorbed by the additional casting.

[Ernir]

That sucks then, losing SP reduces versatility which a PrC should be doing the opposite of, sure some of the abilities are cool or good for a specific build but I don't see it being taken past lvl2-3 (Mastery of Elements for use against Immune Enemies, Arcane Reach for some cool Touch Spells, Spell Power for an odd-numbered casting stat) and certainly not all 5 levels simply from the SP cost.
Hmm. Sometimes cool or good for a specific build, but not always and not always good all the way... sounds like the old Archmage. :smalltongue:
Which I think is OK, really. I look at the old Archmage as a particularly well balanced class as far as caster PrCs go, one that takes a nontrivial chunk out of your spellcasting ability without gimping you to the point where the spells you're casting aren't appropriate for the encounters you're facing (lost caster levels, I'm looking at you).

But you may have a point. Assuming for a moment that the class features reducing your SP pool isn't fundamentally bad design, do you think any of the High Arcanas have too high of an SP cost associated with them?

[Ernir]

Beta version 1.05a is out.

Fundamentally, this wasn't a huge update, since I was mostly just adding more domains. Functionally, though, this might be a bit bigger, as the domains I was adding were the Death, Healing, Strength and War domains, which brings the Cleric class much closer to being actually playable. Once I have the Knowledge, Luck, and Protection domains up as well, the generic "I usually just throw up some buffs and then hit stuff, but I heal after combat and ask my god for advice when we don't know what to do" Cleric concept should more or less work.

[Lord_Gareth]

I'll be taking a look at this when I get off of work, Ernir. I'm very excited about this concept.

[Ernir]

Raise your hand if you thought I had forgotten about this. :smalltongue:

Well, I haven't.

The Cleric class still isn't finished, but the Bard class is (including its whole spell list). I also updated the gnome race due to the changes to its SLAs, added an example of how a monster could be updated to fit the system (the Ogre Mage), and added a line of fluff to each spell.

[Ernir]

Bump for great justice and beta version 1.07!

The Cleric class is done. All 24 domains of it. Whew.

[Draz74]

Bravo, sir. Only Druid and Ranger left in Core?

EDIT: Oh, I see you pulled a 2e and declared Druid to be a variant Cleric again. K, I think I'm down with that. :smallsmile:

EDIT AGAIN: Out of professional curiosity, what word processor are you using to write these files? For your sake, I'm really hoping it's got a really good interface for setting up internal hyperlinks ...

[Ernir]

Bravo, sir. Only Druid and Ranger left in Core?
Thanks.

And yes, only the Ranger left!

It's going to get a treatment similar to the one the Paladin got. More spellcasting (due to this being, you know, a spellcasting project), bonus feats, and some of the class features turned into feats.

EDIT AGAIN: Out of professional curiosity, what word processor are you using to write these files? For your sake, I'm really hoping it's got a really good interface for setting up internal hyperlinks ...
Not a word processor, actually. I'm using LaTeX.
20913 lines of it right now. :smalleek:

[RedWarlock]

Any chance you could shrink those margins? The page-count for this doc is huge, but then you've got fully half the page space taken up by those massive margins. They look like they're 2-3" on each side, from where I'm standing. You could probably cut your page-count in half by putting them down to a more normal .75" or 1". PDFs that aren't getting printed don't even need that much, .5" on all sides would do it.

Other than that (and my own personal preference that the druid be a distinct caster-type, splitting primal/nature off from divine) I think they look great.

I'd probably set it up differently in my game (I cross-balance full-casting with low BAB, so that my full-casting divine priest is wizard-like, clerics/druids (renamed to save on confusion) only get 6th level spells as a bard or psi-warrior, and paladins/rangers keep their 4th level casting..), but I see a lot of potential in stealing the spell list for my own purposes..

[Ernir]

Any chance you could shrink those margins? The page-count for this doc is huge, but then you've got fully half the page space taken up by those massive margins. They look like they're 2-3" on each side, from where I'm standing. You could probably cut your page-count in half by putting them down to a more normal .75" or 1". PDFs that aren't getting printed don't even need that much, .5" on all sides would do it.
I could reduce the margins.
Currently, they are this big because that's the default margin size defined by LaTeX. Here's an explanation of why (source, courtesy of Google (http://www.andy-roberts.net/writing/latex/page_layout)):

Readers from a word processing background are probably all thinking why there is so much white space surrounding the text. There is a good reason, and it's all down to readability. Have a look in a few books, and pick a few lines at random. Count the number of characters per line. I bet the average is about 66. Studies have shown that it's easier to read text when there are 60-70 characters per line - and it would seem that 66 is the optimal number. Therefore, the page margins are set to ensure that readability remains as good as possible.
So it's not just me being eccentric.

With half-inch margins, it'd look something like this: .png snapshot (http://www3.hi.is/~eth31/DnD_Pictures/HalfInchMargins.png)/Full .pdf (http://www3.hi.is/~eth31/DnD_Stuff/VtPHalfInchMargins.pdf). Which... I really don't think is an improvement.

That being said, I'm probably going to fiddle with the margins and other typesetting issues once I'm done getting the content out. I think I'm most likely to end up with smaller margins, a smaller font, and a two-column layout. It's just not a huge priority right now, with me not having removed the "beta" prefix from the edition name.

Other than that (and my own personal preference that the druid be a distinct caster-type, splitting primal/nature off from divine) I think they look great.

I'd probably set it up differently in my game (I cross-balance full-casting with low BAB, so that my full-casting divine priest is wizard-like, clerics/druids (renamed to save on confusion) only get 6th level spells as a bard or psi-warrior, and paladins/rangers keep their 4th level casting..), but I see a lot of potential in stealing the spell list for my own purposes..
Thanks. :smallsmile:

Let me know if you put your own spin on it, I'd be intrigued to see how it turns out.

[sreservoir]

Thanks.

And yes, only the Ranger left!

It's going to get a treatment similar to the one the Paladin got. More spellcasting (due to this being, you know, a spellcasting project), bonus feats, and some of the class features turned into feats.

Not a word processor, actually. I'm using LaTeX.
20913 lines of it right now. :smalleek:

you really should reduce the margins. those margins are huge. the expected number of characters per line isn't a defense because they're like 80 per line already. and in general, increasing font size tends to be better for readability than decreasing margins anyway.

(any chance of publishing the source? I'm quite interested in the code for some of those tables.)

[RedWarlock]

I could reduce the margins.
Currently, they are this big because that's the default margin size defined by LaTeX. Here's an explanation of why (source, courtesy of Google (http://www.andy-roberts.net/writing/latex/page_layout)):

<snip>

That being said, I'm probably going to fiddle with the margins and other typesetting issues once I'm done getting the content out. I think I'm most likely to end up with smaller margins, a smaller font, and a two-column layout. It's just not a huge priority right now, with me not having removed the "beta" prefix from the edition name.

Ah, I figured it might be something like that, but yeah, I'd have set it up with a 2-column layout beforehand, mostly because then it's a lot easier to deal with added formatting and layout issues. (I tend to replicate the standard book layout, two columns, with floating boxes for page-width tables and the like.)


Thanks. :smallsmile:

Let me know if you put your own spin on it, I'd be intrigued to see how it turns out.

I'd been talking with a couple of my players about the domain-only variant someone else had posted up here, yours works similarly.

My biggest issue is in trying to establish whether or not the cleric/divine classes need to be attached to or separate from the 'healer' role in a party composition. They have their ties, but I keep wanting to see divine classes doing more in the other party roles (that doesn't mean turning them into a 1-man army).

[flabort]

I wish my computer would open PDFs, as it is it barely runs anything.
So, I can't view this (yet), even though it sounds interesting.

I do have some questions, though (Which you may have answered in the PDF, I'm sorry if I did):

A) How will this work with existing PrCs?

B) Will you be rewriting PrCs as well (Like Archmage, or Mystic Theurge)?

C) Will you expand out of Core eventually (For example, Warlock or Ur-Priest)?

D) How will ACFs now affect these classes/will you rewrite them, too (Cloistered Cleric, Bardic Sage, etc.)?

[Ernir]

you really should reduce the margins. those margins are huge. the expected number of characters per line isn't a defense because they're like 80 per line already. and in general, increasing font size tends to be better for readability than decreasing margins anyway.

(any chance of publishing the source? I'm quite interested in the code for some of those tables.)
The chars-per-line thing is not a defense, it's the default. The defense is that I haven't gotten around to thinking about formatting! :smalltongue:

The source for the tables, you say? Damn.A few Some Most of those are complete hacks! :smallredface:
Here's a zip (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/19444168/source.zip) of the latest source (and from here on out, this file will be updated at the same time the Bleeding Edge (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/19444168/VancianToPsionicsBleedingEdge.pdf) pdf is). ArcaneToPsionics.tex is the root file, if you want to try compiling this yourself.
EDIT: The source is now available on Github. (https://github.com/Ernir/VancianToPsionics).

Ah, I figured it might be something like that, but yeah, I'd have set it up with a 2-column layout beforehand, mostly because then it's a lot easier to deal with added formatting and layout issues. (I tend to replicate the standard book layout, two columns, with floating boxes for page-width tables and the like.)
I've done the two-column thing once before from the start, and I found that it didn't really help to do it before I know the shape and size of the content.
(And I know I'm going to have to give most of the tables an overhaul before I make stuff "final" anyway.)

But what do you say, do you think I should start compiling with smaller margins? Doesn't really make a huge difference on my end.

I'd been talking with a couple of my players about the domain-only variant someone else had posted up here, yours works similarly.

My biggest issue is in trying to establish whether or not the cleric/divine classes need to be attached to or separate from the 'healer' role in a party composition. They have their ties, but I keep wanting to see divine classes doing more in the other party roles (that doesn't mean turning them into a 1-man army).
One thing you may notice is that Clerics who don't take the Healing domain aren't really any good at healing. So yeah, unless the peer pressure is strong enough to get players to build their Clerics around healing, it should be very difficult to force someone into healing.

I wish my computer would open PDFs, as it is it barely runs anything.
So, I can't view this (yet), even though it sounds interesting.

I do have some questions, though (Which you may have answered in the PDF, I'm sorry if I did):

A) How will this work with existing PrCs?

B) Will you be rewriting PrCs as well (Like Archmage, or Mystic Theurge)?

C) Will you expand out of Core eventually (For example, Warlock or Ur-Priest)?

D) How will ACFs now affect these classes/will you rewrite them, too (Cloistered Cleric, Bardic Sage, etc.)?

A) Mostly OK, I hope. Psionic PrCs might actually be more applicable mechanically, but the differences shouldn't be enormous. There are some no-nos that should be avoided when allowing PrCs for use with this system (PrCs that increase caster level or give extra domains should not be taken as written), and some PrCs that depend on certain spells or class features might end up wonky. Overall, I'd expect it to be similarly difficult as adapting a 3.5 PrC for use with Pathfinder.

B) Yes, I'm going to do the Core PrCs. I've done the Archmage and the Dragon Disciple already.

C) Due to legal reasons, no, I don't think I can. That being said, I can foresee me adding stuff on to this for some time after I'm finished with the Core, to fill out the niches that the Core doesn't cover. It's not unreasonable to assume that some of these homebrewed will be thematically similar to what is found in the 3.5 splats.

D) It's going to need some tweaking, but like the PrCs, it should... more or less work out, I hope. Looking at the Cloistered Cleric:
HD reduction: Works. BAB reduction: Works. Class skills: Works. Weapon and armor proficiency: Works. Lore: Works. Knowledge Domain for free: Danger. Domains are much more valuable under this system. Keep that in mind before allowing it. More class spells: You'd have to find the equivalent spells, and add them to the list of spells the Cleric can learn. Probably in addition to the spells available to a Cleric due to his domains.
So yeah, you'd need to work with the DM, at least until I can make an update pamphlet. :smalltongue:

[Realms of Chaos]

Well, Ernir, you are officially my hero. No amount of thanks could be enough for what you have done. I think I'm about to cry.

[Ragingsystem]

This is the greatest thing ever! I've been looking for something like it for so long!

[Ernir]

Well, Ernir, you are officially my hero. No amount of thanks could be enough for what you have done. I think I'm about to cry.


This is the greatest thing ever! I've been looking for something like it for so long!

:smallredface:

I really don't know what to say. Thanks.

[Maho-Tsukai]

I must say I absolutely love the work you have done here, though sadly you still give the wizard little reason to specialize in necromancy. Despite that, though, I do love your work and I'll be sending you a PM in regards to it in a bit...

[silphael]

Just saw something: the "bug" with dragon disciple isn't corrected? So when you reach level 10 in the PrC, you begin an infinite loop with the prerequisite.

[Ernir]

I must say I absolutely love the work you have done here, though sadly you still give the wizard little reason to specialize in necromancy. Despite that, though, I do love your work and I'll be sending you a PM in regards to it in a bit...
Well, there are the specialist only spells. Necromancers get their share of those, just like everyone else. What kind of incentive did you have in mind?

Adapting the UA-style specialist wizard ACFs is somewhere on the to-do list, by the way.

Just saw something: the "bug" with dragon disciple isn't corrected? So when you reach level 10 in the PrC, you begin an infinite loop with the prerequisite.
As far as I know, it isn't a bug in core 3.5. The clause about losing class features if you cease to qualify is in the 3.0 DMG and some 3.5 splats, but not in the 3.5 DMG. So at least in this isolated environment, it works.

But, it still bears mentioning. I have now added a footnote!

[sreservoir]

word of recall's table is borked.

also, I have to be amused by "wombat's boost" and "word of god."

[Ernir]

word of recall's table is borked.
Ah, I see what you mean. Fixed.


also, I have to be amused by "wombat's boost" and "word of god."

:smalltongue:
I removed the silly material components, only to be replaced by silly spell names and fluff...

[Maho-Tsukai]

I have a question regarding the Dragon Disciple...you says it gains no new spells known uppon leveling yet it's maximum spell level increases? I want to know....why increase it's maximum spell level if it's not getting new spells known? None of your caster classes can actually obtain spells known other then by leveling so why bother actually advancing max spell level when your not getting any high level spells at all if your playing a Dragon Disciple? Is there a way to add to your spells known without leveling that I missed? Or is that just added so you can learn higher level spells once you finish the PrC?

[sreservoir]

I have a question regarding the Dragon Disciple...you says it gains no new spells known uppon leveling yet it's maximum spell level increases? I want to know....why increase it's maximum spell level if it's not getting new spells known? None of your caster classes can actually obtain spells known other then by leveling so why bother actually advancing max spell level when your not getting any high level spells at all if your playing a Dragon Disciple? Is there a way to add to your spells known without leveling that I missed? Or is that just added so you can learn higher level spells once you finish the PrC?

taking another level, one which does give spells known, should work.

[Ernir]

I have a question regarding the Dragon Disciple...you says it gains no new spells known uppon leveling yet it's maximum spell level increases? I want to know....why increase it's maximum spell level if it's not getting new spells known? None of your caster classes can actually obtain spells known other then by leveling so why bother actually advancing max spell level when your not getting any high level spells at all if your playing a Dragon Disciple? Is there a way to add to your spells known without leveling that I missed? Or is that just added so you can learn higher level spells once you finish the PrC?
Yes, the max spell level increase is mostly so you aren't completely screwed over once you step out of the class. This way, once you finish the class at, say, ECL 15, you could start taking reasonably level-appropriate spells rather than spells that belong on a character 10 levels lower (or as would be the usual method in 3.5, just giving up on spellcasting altogether).

You could also dip levels of your previous spellcasting class while working through Dragon Disciple to get some mid-level spells (which is what sreservoir is suggesting, I believe). The Expanded Knowledge feat would also be open to you, a feat that I consider fairly integral to the system.

[Ernir]

The Ranger i s more or less done (it's up in Bleeding Edge (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/19444168/VancianToPsionicsBleedingEdge.pdf)). I just want to make some more TWF-friendly spells, possibly shuffle some of the class features between levels, and I can call it a class.
The Arcane Archer is done too.

I'm going through the magic items now (again), while I come up with more ideas for the Ranger. It would be simple enough to do a straight conversion - after all, that's what WotC did with the psionic items. Psionic tattoos are just potions, power stones are just scrolls, dorjes are just wands, and psicrowns are just staffs. With some details switched around, obviously.
It's a conversion that makes me think "damn, I can do better than that. :smallconfused:", TBH.
The biggest issue, IMO, is the thing about scrolls/power stones being both the one-use-only throwaway items AND the "expand your arsenal" items. As far as I can tell, addressing a power stone to cast the spell stored in it doesn't flush it, which makes it a ridiculously cheap source of extra powers known. That's how I translated it currently, but I think I'm going to change it so that the item called "scroll" is effectively a purchased extra spell known, and the one-use spell completion item is something new (or merged into something else. Like oils and potions).
With everyone having limited spells known already, system really is in need of something like the Dragon Magazine Knowstones, IMO. =/




In other news!
I'm starting up a new campaign IRL, with me in the DM's seat.
Naturally, I'm using this.
We met for chargen on friday, and ended up with the following:
An elven Bard
An elven Magic/Protection domain Cleric
A halfling Sorceress
A human War/Law domain Cleric
Yes, all of them picked one of the new classes. I don't know whether they did it to make me happy or because they were just excited to try them out, but I'm pleased. :smallbiggrin:
One thing that stood out during chargen is that even though the Cleric domains are pretty damn front-loaded as-is, they may not be front-loaded enough. Making a low-level Cleric could end up being like making a low-level Crusader - just not enough options to give anything but the illusion of choice. Think I'll end up expanding the general availability of low-level spells on the domains. =/

[RedWarlock]

I know you built the Ranger to match the Paladin as a PsyWarrior transplant, but I'd be curious to see what you would do with a 4th level caster as they are. I don't really see the Psywarrior as the counterpart to a Paladin, (and full BAB AND 6th-level casting makes me cringe.)

I know you can't put it in, but I'm curious how you would handle the concept behind a Warmage-style caster, that knows all spells for each level they can cast, but have a very limited list. Someone on the MinMax boards made a beguiler/warmage/dread-necro equivalent that fills a 4th spot (in the stereotypical wizard role (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=2410.0)), and I'm using the quartet, with some tweaks, for my houserules. I'm trying to gauge how hard it would be to rewrite all four to use your spells as base.

(Plus, I've still got to figure out how I want to split off the druid. My houserules before split off the ranger, druid, and (spirit) shaman, using primal spells, and I'm trying to figure out how to reflect that under your rules when the druid doesn't really even stand alone.)

Plus, I'm noticing you have a Moon domain of your own creation, but no Sun domain.. and of the core domains, that's the ONLY one missing.

[Ernir]

I know you built the Ranger to match the Paladin as a PsyWarrior transplant, but I'd be curious to see what you would do with a 4th level caster as they are.
Extending the casting progressions wasn't exactly easy. =/

I stole old Druid spells for the 5th and 6th level Ranger spells, old Cleric spells for the 5th and 6th level Paladin spells, and made up a few new ones.

I don't really see the Psywarrior as the counterpart to a Paladin,
The Ranger and Paladin are built to emulate the PsyWar not because the classes have anything thematically in common (they don't), but because it's the only casting + melee psionic chassis we have in the SRD. Also, it's a chassis that works pretty well, so...

(and full BAB AND 6th-level casting makes me cringe.)
Ehh, I've got to play this one up to a paradigm difference. In my opinion, BAB isn't a class feature, but a statistic. Classes whose combat role is going to be defines by making full attacks with weapons need that statistic.

Psywars get away OK with 3/4 due to much of their punch being delivered via natural attacks and rider effects. And I still think full BAB would have made more sense

The thing about the Paladin chassis that I've most been thinking about nerfing is the Will save. Might be less than needed with Divine Grace being stronger on single-classed Paladins now (due to reduced MAD).

I know you can't put it in, but I'm curious how you would handle the concept behind a Warmage-style caster, that knows all spells for each level they can cast, but have a very limited list. Someone on the MinMax boards made a beguiler/warmage/dread-necro equivalent that fills a 4th spot (in the stereotypical wizard role (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=2410.0)), and I'm using the quartet, with some tweaks, for my houserules. I'm trying to gauge how hard it would be to rewrite all four to use your spells as base.
I think the conversion of the full-list caster concept should go over relatively painlessly. The actual classes themselves might need a bit of tweaking (especially the Dread Necro and his minionmancy), but I can't foresee any systematic problems. Full-list spontaneous casters are still just spontaneous casters, and here, every class is a spontaneous caster.

Just remember that spells known are much more precious under this system.

(Plus, I've still got to figure out how I want to split off the druid. My houserules before split off the ranger, druid, and (spirit) shaman, using primal spells, and I'm trying to figure out how to reflect that under your rules when the druid doesn't really even stand alone.)
There are definitely many ways to skin that cat. I just ended up choosing the one that made both Clerics and Druids more like the Ardent. :smalltongue:

Plus, I'm noticing you have a Moon domain of your own creation, but no Sun domain.. and of the core domains, that's the ONLY one missing.

:smallredface:

I left out the Sun domain when I originally split up the Cleric list due to its enormous overlap with the Fire domain. It isn't really missing as much as it was swallowed whole by the Fire domain (you can still see "Greater Turning" on the list of Fire domain granted powers).
Getting it back in is somewhere on the to-do list. It's just that currently, even if the Fire domain is the largest domain, I don't have quite the amount of material needed to fill two of them.

As for the Moon domain, one of my players in my current RL campaign wanted to play a priestess of a moon goddess. Hence, new domain. :smalltongue:

[Ernir]

Aaaand a bump for the beta 1.08 update.

To (the hypothetical) those of you who have been watching the Bleeding Edge PDF, you won't see a huge difference.

To those of you who last saw it in September, which is when I sent out the 1.07 beta, this should be a different document.

I got rid of the dreaded single-column layout, added most of the remaining core caster PrCs, the Sun domain, artwork ugly stick figures, more magic items, and the Ranger class.

Another year or so and I might take away the beta status! :smallbiggrin:

EDIT: And I changed the title of this thread. Let's see whether this one sounds less clinical.
EDIT2: No, title change didn't go through. Owell.

[Ernir]

Bump for an update to beta 1.09.

We now have magic rings, and the Adept class.

Also, I changed how summons work. It's not a single spell that summons a "monster" any more (That is, it is not just a clone of Astral Construct).
I did the best I could to split the creatures on the (real, WotC SRD) Summon Monster and Summon Nature's Ally lists into thematic subgroups, and turned each of those groups into a single spell that grants access to progressively more powerful creatures via augments.
Most importantly, I think this makes creating themed casters/summoners much more believable. Druids can now summon creatures that are different from Wizard summons in ways that aren't just fluff - and I like to think I managed to cut away some of the massive bookkeeping-blubber that were the old SM and SNA spell lines.

Finally, you have your share of reformatting, minor fixes, and random spell additions. I added a spell to make cultists explode (called Last Laugh), which I am very proud of. :smalltongue:

[Larkas]

Subscribed! From what I've read, this is the best homebrew translation of spellcasting to spell points I've ever laid my eyes on. Keep it up!

[NineThePuma]

Just out of curiosity, how would you go about converting something like, for example, Duskblade to this system?

[Ernir]

Subscribed! From what I've read, this is the best homebrew translation of spellcasting to spell points I've ever laid my eyes on. Keep it up!
Glad to hear it gives a good impression. :smallsmile:

I don't update this very often, but when I do, I make note of it here.

Just out of curiosity, how would you go about converting something like, for example, Duskblade to this system?

The Duskblade shouldn't be too hard to convert.

The HD, BAB, saves and skills don't really have to be modified. The number of spells known and the max spell level progression can even stay the same, too. It should get a very high number of spell points for a half-caster (maybe just the Wizard/Cleric progression?), if we're remaining faithful.

As for class features:

Arcane Attunement: This just means Duskblades get Cantrips like Wizards do. I could place restrictions on its use to keep it this limited, but I don't see a reason to.
Armored Mage: ASF doesn't exist here. My first thought is to just give them light armor proficiency and light shield proficiency at 1st level, medium armor proficiency at 4th, and so on.
Combat Casting: Grants a feat, which hasn't changed.
Arcane Channeling, Quick Cast, and Spell Power should all work without changing a letter.

The real challenge would be to re-create its spell list. The core spells are already here, of course, but the PHB2 spells would just have to be converted one at a time.
I'd have to be careful not to give it too many spells that completely mutate when augmented, though. For example, the Duskblade gets Waves of Fatigue. The way I rewrote Waves of Fatigue, it augments into becoming "Waves of Exhaustion". Since Duskblades get an un-stunted CL progression, this means they would be capable of augmenting their Waves of Fatigue into Waves of Exhaustion at the same level a Wizard could.



Now, these are just my first thoughts on what would need to be done to convert the class to accommodate this system.
Whether the PHB2 class is good enough as it is printed is another question. :smalltongue:

[NineThePuma]

Honestly, I strongly considered giving it the ability to just pump SP into a damage boosting sword attack or something, but wanted to get a second opinion. Those do sound fairly reasonable, though perhaps the ASF stuff could be converted to apply to something else.

[eggs]

Very nice work!
I keep thinking I'm being clever by finding a big hole somewhere, just to find it's either already a part of the core version, or it's already been filled. :smalltongue:

Also, great presentation - all the linking must have been a pain, but it's a godsend. :smallsmile:

Are you still fiddling with the system?
I'm not clear how Miracle, Lesser Wish and Wish work with augments when they replicate spells. Miracle seems particularly sticky. It'd be handy to see your take.

One of two players I've conned into trying this out this week agreed on the condition that we hammer out a Hexblade under these rules. So we'll probably be negotiating something along the lines of the Paladin later on. I'll report on how it goes.

[eggs]

I hate to double-post, but if this gets my last comment to appear...

[Ernir]

Honestly, I strongly considered giving it the ability to just pump SP into a damage boosting sword attack or something, but wanted to get a second opinion. Those do sound fairly reasonable, though perhaps the ASF stuff could be converted to apply to something else.

I think I'd reserve that for a conversion of the Arcane Strike feat, myself.

But for what it's worth, I have converted Deep Crystal (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/items/specialMaterials.htm) weapons. It's under Magic Items -> Special Magical Materials -> Spellsteel.



great presentation - all the linking must have been a pain, but it's a godsend.
It's relatively painless, really. Instead of writing "Magic Missile" in the source code, I write "\nameref{Spell:MagicMissile}", and the links take care of themselves.

I'd never have tried this with a word processor. :smalleek:

Are you still fiddling with the system?
With the base system, no, not really. With its components (spells, classes, etc.), yes. Plenty.

I'm not clear how Miracle, Lesser Wish and Wish work with augments when they replicate spells. Miracle seems particularly sticky. It'd be handy to see your take.Good question. A wonder it hasn't come up before, really. :smallconfused:
(I also see that Reality Revision (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/realityRevision.htm) doesn't address it. Grumblegrumble.)

By default, I you don't get the augments, I guess.
I should probably change that to just give the full augments (the duplicated spell being augmented to cost a number of SP equal to the SP spent on casting the duplicating spell), or something close to full, though. Augments are just that important here.


One of two players I've conned into trying this out this week agreed on the condition that we hammer out a Hexblade under these rules. So we'll probably be negotiating something along the lines of the Paladin later on. I'll report on how it goes.
I did have plans for a Hexblade-esque class at one point, but the Blackguard class ended up swallowing it.

My recommendation would be to
Stretch the Blackguard into a base class (pretty much like the Paladin). Replace Smite with Hexblade's Curse Make other Hexblade class features available as Unholy Gifts (or whatever you rename them as) at appropriate intervals, removing the more canonical Blackguard ones like the Fiendish Mount. Change the spellcasting to arcane (not that it really matters), and fiddle a bit with the spell list to include fewer aligment/divine-ish spells and more arcane-ish spells.

[eggs]

By default, I you don't get the augments, I guess.
I should probably change that to just give the full augments (the duplicated spell being augmented to cost a number of SP equal to the SP spent on casting the duplicating spell), or something close to full, though. Augments are just that important here.
That was my first impression, but it gets really wonky with Miracle.

Normally, spell level is a much more limiting factor - Miracle's only going to Planar Bind a 12 HD Outsider, summon a monster off the SNA 7 list, etc. But with the augment-based mechanics, just learning Miracle is like learning 95% of the game's spell effects at once, and doing so at full efficiency.

It might need to be stuck with a painful XP cost to keep level-appropriate effects while staying true to concept and relatively sane. :smallyuk:

[Quellian-dyrae]

Maybe just phrase it as "You get 15 SP that you can use to cast any spell on your class spell list, whether you know it or not. You get 13 SP that you can use to cast spells that do not appear on your class spell list. This SP must be spent immediately and counts as a separate source of SP from your normal SP pool."

[Ernir]

Quellian-dyrae, I think that may be the solution.:smallsmile:



We could then end up with something like this:

A Miracle can do any of the following things without an experience cost:
Duplicate any spell costing 15 spell points or less that appears on the spell lists of domains available to you. If you are not a Cleric, your Miracles can not duplicate spells costing 15 spell points.
Duplicate any other spell costing 13 spell points or less.
(More options)
You can augment the duplicated spells, up to the appropriate spell point limit. You can also apply any metamagic feat you know to the spell, again subject to the spell point limit, and other restrictions such as expending your magical focus. For example, a Cleric who knows the Empower Spell feat using Miracle to duplicate a Scorching Ray spell could augment it to cost 11 spell points, and apply the effects of the Empower Spell feat by expending his magical focus.

Duplicated spells allow saves and spell resistance as normal (but save DCs are for the number of spell points spent on the Miracle).

[eggs]

This one-shot trial run is looking like it's going to be an on-and-off weekend project, but it's fun!

Last night, we started running a swashbuckling game with a gnome hexblade (pretty much rehashed out of the Paladin/Blackguard), a human paladin and a gnome sorcerer. The party started at level 9, and I'm hoping to edge them just over 10 by the end of the adventure.

I was a bit concerned ahead of time about most of the party using the Psychic Warrior's typically PP-starved pool (including using it for healing purposes), but that wasn't an issue - they absolutely cruised through level-appropriate encounters (something I'd worry about if I were trying to balance to the Swashbuckler/Ninja power-level, but I'm really not).

What impressed me was the versatility that the Paladin squeezed out of it. Even with limited PP, and an obligation to limit it even further to keep Lay on Hands charged, it wasn't stumped in noncombat/social situations - the mobility powers and Hidden Talent (Summon Aerial Monster) gave it a surprising amount of flexibility.

I was also initially worried about the celestial mount using the chassis of a level-appropriate Warrior, but it was never a problem. The scariest thing the companion did was turn into the go-to platform for the Sorcerer's polymorph spells.

The only time any of the characters really became useless was when they were blindsided by an underwater battle against a dragon turtle. It probably should have been a TPK, but I did some coddling on the DM end; after that fight, the players were bitter about the changes to their normal all-purpose problem-solvers (Alter Self, Summon X, etc.), but this is probably a better design.

At the end of the first session, I wound up gutting the Mounted Charge and Intimidate mechanics because they were overshadowing most of the new rules' effects. With the core mechanic of his build nerfed hard, the Hexblade player swapped his character out for a Darfellan Synthesist for today's session (also hacked into the spell point mechanics; that's kind of this player's thing).

So far, I've been surprised by how smoothly it's been working - when I saw the Ranger as a 2/3 caster with all those summon spells, I thought it was being set up to fail as an offensive caster; the Summoner we're using runs off the same engine, and has been the most reliably productive. So I'm sold.

I'm also really liking having different branches of summon spells. That sort of specialization and choice let me work a bunch of various summoners into the adventure, without it getting tiresome.

One thing I hadn't thought about was that the way augments work, spell point Adept doesn't play nicely with the CR rules at all. No matter how bleak the class that raises CL, just augmenting is enough for the characters' abilities to stay approximately on par with PC levels - I broke one encounter by overlooking that: what was supposed to be a light "lizardfolk raiding party" skirmish with a couple CR 5-7 rogues and support casters wound up more of an "it's raining tyrannosaurs" scenario.

I'm not totally sold on retrofitting the SLA mechanic, unless rewriting the entire monster manual from the ground up (I kept running into weird patches of ramped-up power, like the Black Dragon's usually-forgettable Darkness SLA), but I am tempted to crossreference this with the Dragonmark and Warlock books (or any other big SLA source) to see if anything really fun would happen. Just for ****s and giggles.

Tomorrow, I'll be stepping up the psionics and tome of battle presence in the adventure, seeing how smoothly things integrate. But so far playing with this system has been fun. Again, nice work! :smallsmile:

[NineThePuma]

what was supposed to be a light "lizardfolk raiding party" skirmish with a couple CR 5-7 rogues and support casters wound up more of an "it's raining tyrannosaurs" scenario.

This sounds like it has a story behind it.

[eggs]

You know that scene from 40% of Western movies, where a couple bandits ride around town shooting guns, grab a couple chickens and tequila and start setting things on fire? That's how it started. Except the bandits are lizards.

The players can tell this is supposed to be a breezy encounter, so they don't go in with guns blazing. Instead, the Big Damn Hero moseys up to try to scare the bandits straight. This is complicated by the fact that the Big Damn Hero is a gnome paladin, not too much bigger than the chickens the lizards are stealing for dinner.

I figure this is a good time for some bandit in the back to slink into the background and start taking potshots. The first takes the form of a tyrannosaur, which eats the paladin mid-morality lecture. Then things go a bit crazy, with the party trying to rescue the gnome and find the caster, while the other bandits go on a general offensive. In the second round, two more tyrannosaurs pop up to eat the Sorcerer and the Paladin's dog. Between trying to keep the other characters free and being ganged up on by lizardmen, the Summoner gets a bit overwhelmed.

Fast forward a couple rounds to the Synthesist in his Giant-Crab-Man getup staring down 5 tyrannosaurs, a couple high-level manifesters who have juice left and what's still the better part of a lizard gang.

One Bolivian Army cutaway and a few Raise Deads later, the party goes on with its adventure. The players are a bit miffed about the encounter, but when the question comes up of "Why would you do that?" and "that" is a dinosaur, they all understand. :smalltongue:

[Ernir]

I was a bit concerned ahead of time about most of the party using the Psychic Warrior's typically PP-starved pool (including using it for healing purposes), but that wasn't an issue - they absolutely cruised through level-appropriate encounters (something I'd worry about if I were trying to balance to the Swashbuckler/Ninja power-level, but I'm really not).

Yeah, had someone felt as useful as a Swashbuckler, I'd consider the class a fail. :smalltongue:

I, myself, like to think these are easier to pick up than the psionic classes (I don't think I made as many Elfsights and Body Adjustments), but with fewer megatricks. Don't know how right I am yet.


Hidden Talent (Summon Aerial Monster) gave it a surprising amount of flexibility.
Hidden Talent was a feat everyone took at my table. :smallbiggrin:

In my defense, the feat is based directly on the psionic version...


I was also initially worried about the celestial mount using the chassis of a level-appropriate Warrior, but it was never a problem. The scariest thing the companion did was turn into the go-to platform for the Sorcerer's polymorph spells.


The only time any of the characters really became useless was when they were blindsided by an underwater battle against a dragon turtle. It probably should have been a TPK, but I did some coddling on the DM end; after that fight, the players were bitter about the changes to their normal all-purpose problem-solvers (Alter Self, Summon X, etc.), but this is probably a better design.
I'd be worried about power levels if they could just shrug off being surprised by a big fat brute while swimming underwater, with no special preparation. :smalleek:

So I can't say I'm very sympathetic to the party's plight. :smalltongue:

So far, I've been surprised by how smoothly it's been working - when I saw the Ranger as a 2/3 caster with all those summon spells, I thought it was being set up to fail as an offensive caster; the Summoner we're using runs off the same engine, and has been the most reliably productive. So I'm sold.

I'm also really liking having different branches of summon spells. That sort of specialization and choice let me work a bunch of various summoners into the adventure, without it getting tiresome.
Whoo! \o/

One thing I hadn't thought about was that the way augments work, spell point Adept doesn't play nicely with the CR rules at all. No matter how bleak the class that raises CL, just augmenting is enough for the characters' abilities to stay approximately on par with PC levels - I broke one encounter by overlooking that: what was supposed to be a light "lizardfolk raiding party" skirmish with a couple CR 5-7 rogues and support casters wound up more of an "it's raining tyrannosaurs" scenario.
Oops. :smalleek:

Were you using the NPC CR = NPC class level/2 formula (as you get from the monster advancement rules), or the NPC CR = NPC class level -1 formula (as you get from the DMG page 38)? For the Adept (mine or just the SRD one), I think the latter is significantly more sane.

I suppose slicing away at its caster level wouldn't be entirely out of order, but I am a bit surprised. (And curious. You threw out a 13th+ level Adept? :smalltongue:)


I'm not totally sold on retrofitting the SLA mechanic, unless rewriting the entire monster manual from the ground up (I kept running into weird patches of ramped-up power, like the Black Dragon's usually-forgettable Darkness SLA), but I am tempted to crossreference this with the Dragonmark and Warlock books (or any other big SLA source) to see if anything really fun would happen. Just for ****s and giggles.
Err, yeah, about that...

This is what I consider the biggest problem with using the system right now. If you use the monsters unmodified (considering their SLA references as references to the old spells), you aren't getting great mileage out of the document, and end up with two conflicting sets of RAW. If you treat all SLA references as references to the updated spells, then yes, you can get wonky stuff due to monsters sometimes getting SLAs at enormous caster levels.

To be honest, I've been thinking about fiddling with the core way SLAs are handled. Free augments up to the CL is soooo huge. :smallfrown:


Tomorrow, I'll be stepping up the psionics and tome of battle presence in the adventure, seeing how smoothly things integrate. But so far playing with this system has been fun. Again, nice work! :smallsmile:
Thanks, and by all means keep me posted! :smallbiggrin:

[eggs]

Were you using the NPC CR = NPC class level/2 formula (as you get from the monster advancement rules), or the NPC CR = NPC class level -1 formula (as you get from the DMG page 38)? For the Adept (mine or just the SRD one), I think the latter is significantly more sane.

I suppose slicing away at its caster level wouldn't be entirely out of order, but I am a bit surprised. (And curious. You threw out a 13th+ level Adept? :smalltongue:)
I used the CR = [Monster Base]+[Level/2] mechanic. That was probably a mistake.

And yeah, the Adept's level was kind of unreasonable. I didn't notice that you'd revised the class until mid-session. I normally like using lots of levels in NPC classes for groups of mooks - that way, their offense stays pretty crappy, but the mooks' HP are deep enough that the encounter doesn't end with just one fireball.

So the Adept was initially going to be a Lizardfolk 2/Vancian Scalykind Domain Adept 11 with Practiced Spellcaster (I was digging deep to squeeze the encounter through as CR 10), but when I saw the Spell Point Adept mid-session, I made a quick rewrite.

And when I saw that it could start summoning dinosaurs, I thought that was just too hilarious to pass up. :smalltongue:

[Ernir]

The CR system is kind of broken. Who would have thought? :smalltongue:

But yes, I'll get to finding ways to humble the class a bit...

[Andrian Talehot]

ummm I was looking at this at first going that sounds so cool ... then I went to take a look at some of my favourite spells so I look up animate dead and create undead ... I love being a necromancer but when I look at this I have to be honest and say that I can't see anyone ever wanting to play one under this current system where even creating you basic run of the mill zombies has an XP cost. ... I am currently playing a dread necromancer and if I had been using this system then I would be a level or two lower then every one else in the party and would have more gold since I wouldn't have spent so much of it on black onyx. In short from what I have looked up so far it seems that you have removed costly marital components and replaced them with XP costs. I have to agree that the Vatican system sucks and love this idea but I can't understand why you would have removed costly spell components and replaced them with an XP cost I mean why shouldn't some magic still use items to use fully? Now the only way that I can imagine some one wanting to be a fully fledged Necromancer is if they forced NPs to create them and then used control undead (which doesn't have an XP cost) on them. I can see why there are some spells out there that really deserve a XP cost (mainly those high level ones) but punishing your dad to day necromancer for casting his class's iconic spells is just wrong.

Now I don't mean to say that your system is bad or any thing like that I just think that its a bit unfair. The fact is undead are useful but unless you are constantly healing them they are fragile and the sad fact is that they will fall apart as you level up (taking a single blow from what ever new monster that you just happens to cross paths with)

[NineThePuma]

The psionics system does not use material components; All such components have been replaced with an XP cost.

Just my opinion though.

[Ernir]

Yes, the expensive material component -> XP component switch wasn't one I had a particularly strong opinion on, but it came with the system, so I included it.

That being said... I think you may be overestimating the impact XP costs have on a caster. There is the "XP is a river" phenomenon, and in the case of creating undead, the simple fact that the XP costs just aren't very high. To create something like the stock 17 HD Cloud Giant skeleton, you'd be expending 85 XP. It would take some effort to fall two levels behind spamming that, I think.

Finally, did you take a look at the Death domain? It has a granted power that allows you to ignore the XP cost. :smalltongue:

[Andrian Talehot]

no I didn't take a look at the death domain ... as for overestimating the xp cost ... well I cast this spell a lot ... as in people in the group started to think that I was getting addicted to using it ... if we killed something the first thing that our DM would say to us was if I could animate it or not ... I try with just about anything ... The DM even said and one point no you can't animate it before I found a way to (he was referring to a demon that blew its self up to try and kill us leaving no body behind) ... so ok maybe I was exaduating a little bit but still I would be a bit behind the rest of the group or unable to do what I wanted to do with my spell (our group simply says no to XP cost and simply finds a way to limit such spells which would mean that a huge amount of spells would be difficult to use.)
Back to the Death domain though. I'll be the first to admit that I have no intention of playing a cleric or any other divine character simply because I really really hate the idea of praying to a god to get your powers. I know that I am being over the top in that view but thats just me ... over all though I have taken more of a look at the system and I really like it! Good job! I may very well use this system in my next campaign (I'll just home brew materials back into it)

[RedWarlock]

I may very well use this system in my next campaign (I'll just home brew materials back into it)

One idea could be to make the material components as an optional substitute for the XP costs, so that material components aren't necessary, but they make it easier to use.

Just a thought. Then it becomes an item-based component option, rather than needing to be built onto the spells.

[Swooper]

Back to the Death domain though. I'll be the first to admit that I have no intention of playing a cleric or any other divine character simply because I really really hate the idea of praying to a god to get your powers.
You could of course, you know, refluff it. It's not like the arcane/divine division matters at all in this system. Just play a cleric, take the cloistered cleric variant, grab the death domain along with something else that looks nice. Ignore the stuff about gods, carry a spellbook if you like. BAM, you're a necromancer.

[Andrian Talehot]

You could of course, you know, refluff it. It's not like the arcane/divine division matters at all in this system. Just play a cleric, take the cloistered cleric variant, grab the death domain along with something else that looks nice. Ignore the stuff about gods, carry a spellbook if you like. BAM, you're a necromancer.

One idea could be to make the material components as an optional substitute for the XP costs, so that material components aren't necessary, but they make it easier to use.

Just a thought. Then it becomes an item-based component option, rather than needing to be built onto the spells.

Thanks a lot I really like both of those ideas :smallbiggrin:

[sreservoir]

ummm I was looking at this at first going that sounds so cool ... then I went to take a look at some of my favourite spells so I look up animate dead and create undead ... I love being a necromancer but when I look at this I have to be honest and say that I can't see anyone ever wanting to play one under this current system where even creating you basic run of the mill zombies has an XP cost. ... I am currently playing a dread necromancer and if I had been using this system then I would be a level or two lower then every one else in the party and would have more gold since I wouldn't have spent so much of it on black onyx. In short from what I have looked up so far it seems that you have removed costly marital components and replaced them with XP costs. I have to agree that the Vatican system sucks and love this idea but I can't understand why you would have removed costly spell components and replaced them with an XP cost I mean why shouldn't some magic still use items to use fully? Now the only way that I can imagine some one wanting to be a fully fledged Necromancer is if they forced NPs to create them and then used control undead (which doesn't have an XP cost) on them. I can see why there are some spells out there that really deserve a XP cost (mainly those high level ones) but punishing your dad to day necromancer for casting his class's iconic spells is just wrong.

Now I don't mean to say that your system is bad or any thing like that I just think that its a bit unfair. The fact is undead are useful but unless you are constantly healing them they are fragile and the sad fact is that they will fall apart as you level up (taking a single blow from what ever new monster that you just happens to cross paths with)

it's useful to note that wealth doesn't really have a correction mechanism built into the system if you too much of it on expendables -- if you fall behind WBL, you're behind forever, unless you actively correct for it. the effect will diminish, but you won't catch up.

xp costs, on the other hand, will cause you to gain xp faster when you're behind by at least a level, and slower if you're ahead; thus, if you're suffering one-off costs (such as if you create undead a few times), the "experience is a river" phenomenon will come to play until you catch up automatically. mathematically modelled, it should be asymptotic behaviour, probably; but due to the usually-discrete nature of exp gain, you'll actually likely overshoot at some point and then you'll be in a long period of erratic xp behaviour where you may or may not be an encounter ahead or behind the rest of the party at any given moment. but you'll get close to them.

[Ernir]

no I didn't take a look at the death domain ... as for overestimating the xp cost ... well I cast this spell a lot ... as in people in the group started to think that I was getting addicted to using it ... if we killed something the first thing that our DM would say to us was if I could animate it or not ... I try with just about anything ... The DM even said and one point no you can't animate it before I found a way to (he was referring to a demon that blew its self up to try and kill us leaving no body behind) ... so ok maybe I was exaduating a little bit but still I would be a bit behind the rest of the group or unable to do what I wanted to do with my spell (our group simply says no to XP cost and simply finds a way to limit such spells which would mean that a huge amount of spells would be difficult to use.)
Back to the Death domain though. I'll be the first to admit that I have no intention of playing a cleric or any other divine character simply because I really really hate the idea of praying to a god to get your powers. I know that I am being over the top in that view but thats just me ... over all though I have taken more of a look at the system and I really like it! Good job! I may very well use this system in my next campaign (I'll just home brew materials back into it)
If that is how you play, I think the [minion] tag is going to cramp your style far more than the XP costs.

One idea could be to make the material components as an optional substitute for the XP costs, so that material components aren't necessary, but they make it easier to use.

Just a thought. Then it becomes an item-based component option, rather than needing to be built onto the spells.
Sure, that can be houseruled. Probably even without breaking everything to pieces.

The conversion rate I used was 5GP -> 1XP.


it's useful to note that wealth doesn't really have a correction mechanism built into the system if you too much of it on expendables -- if you fall behind WBL, you're behind forever, unless you actively correct for it. the effect will diminish, but you won't catch up.

xp costs, on the other hand, will cause you to gain xp faster when you're behind by at least a level, and slower if you're ahead; thus, if you're suffering one-off costs (such as if you create undead a few times), the "experience is a river" phenomenon will come to play until you catch up automatically. mathematically modelled, it should be asymptotic behaviour, probably; but due to the usually-discrete nature of exp gain, you'll actually likely overshoot at some point and then you'll be in a long period of erratic xp behaviour where you may or may not be an encounter ahead or behind the rest of the party at any given moment. but you'll get close to them.
This (^) is one thing I really like about XP costs. If loot flowed this precisely, fueling spells with it would make a lot more sense, IMO.

[Razanir]

1) Would you mind if I make a pdf/google doc for a Pathfinder conversion of this?
2) I've yet to find a polynomial equation for psychic warrior power points, but I do have this:

Start with a base of -1 pp. Yes, a negative number
Gain 2 points for every level over 1
Gain another 2 points for every level over 6
Gain 4 points for every level over 10
Gain another 4 points for every level over 15
EQN: PP=Max(0,2L-3+Max(0,2L-10)+Max(0,4L-36)+Max(0,4L-56))

Messy, but accurate
EDIT: 3) Can we get a Shape of the Humanoid spell? Something like Disguise, but that also changes tactile stuff
EDIT: 3a) Or maybe just an augment for Disguise Self that does that. 4 pp to remove that weakness in the disguise

[Ernir]

Sorry about the seriously slow reply. In my infinite wisdom, I looked at this when I didn't have time to reply, which cleared the notification, which of course made me forget all about it.

1) Would you mind if I make a pdf/google doc for a Pathfinder conversion of this?
Oh, please, go right ahead!

I have the source code for the PDF, if you'd like that.

2) I've yet to find a polynomial equation for psychic warrior power points, but I do have this:

Start with a base of -1 pp. Yes, a negative number
Gain 2 points for every level over 1
Gain another 2 points for every level over 6
Gain 4 points for every level over 10
Gain another 4 points for every level over 15
EQN: PP=Max(0,2L-3+Max(0,2L-10)+Max(0,4L-36)+Max(0,4L-56))

Messy, but accurate
Interesting. That's one pattern I didn't recognize. :smalltongue:

EDIT: 3) Can we get a Shape of the Humanoid spell? Something like Disguise, but that also changes tactile stuff
EDIT: 3a) Or maybe just an augment for Disguise Self that does that. 4 pp to remove that weakness in the disguise
I've been thinking this myself.

And really, the only reason there isn't one is that I haven't been able to decide which approach is better. It's a rather archetypical ability of many monsters, and should be included.

I have a bug fix release I've been sitting on for almost two weeks now, I'll try to get it out tomorrow... including something to make yourself look like a humanoid.

[Ernir]

Okay, this was an odd definition of "tomorrow" (Christmas preparations! :smalleek:), but beta 1.10 is here! \o/

Notable changes:
Added special ways for mages to interact with one another: Circle magic and mage duels. Polymorph spells now allow spellcasting while morphed. This was starting to smell a whole lot like a "because I think spellcasters should be nerfed more!" rule, the polymorph spells should be sufficiently nerfed anyway, and having weird forms makes spellcasting difficult anyway (somatic component). Font change!

EDIT: One more significant one. I backed down on the "no Cleric spell list" thing. There is now a tiny Cleric spell list. It contains only generic spells that any Cleric of any alignment or faith should be able to make use of. I was getting complaints about only the Magic domain having access to something basic like Detect Magic, and so on.

[Zireael]

Downloaded the pdf, looks brilliant, I just have to nitpick about one thing:

“P’TwAnG!” - Sambo, drow Arcane Archer

1) drow cannot be arcane archers
2) what kind of a name is Sambo?
3) what gibberish is it?

[TuggyNE]

Downloaded the pdf, looks brilliant, I just have to nitpick about one thing:


1) drow cannot be arcane archers


That was actually three things :smalltongue:
I'm pretty sure they can, as Drow are a subrace of elves; similarly, it's possible for an Aquatic, Wild, Grey, Wood, or other elf variant to take Arcane Archer (half-elves are specifically included because they're not actually a subrace)

[Ernir]

Downloaded the pdf, looks brilliant
Whoo! \o/

I just have to nitpick about one thing:

1) drow cannot be arcane archers
2) what kind of a name is Sambo?
3) what gibberish is it?

I thought that as an elf subrace (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/elf.htm), they could?
Like all the other PrC character names, these are character names from actual campaigns in which I've played/DMed. :smalltongue:
It's the sound effect he made when he launched an arrow.

[Starbuck_II]

So you upgraded Paladins and Rangers to 3/4th manifester like new Bard or Psi-warr. Seems a little strong, but then I'm used to having to wait for Paladins to cast so overall not sure.

You did the cure spels amazingly. Cure really does convert To Cure Light Mass through augments.

The bless change works as Bless become Prayer and becomes 3rd level to do it just like normal. But now a weaker version only affecting hit is possible as a a 2nd level but hits enemy as well or one that imrpves everything but only allies.

I like Aid's augment change.

You work is appreciated.

[sreservoir]

I have the source code for the PDF, if you'd like that.

this thing, was it? (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/19444168/source.zip)

... the paragraph indentation seems to be a bit buggy all over the place, particularly for things like class features.

(incidentally, do you use, or have you considered using, source control (and making that public)? I, uh, appreciate being able to diff between versions to find what changed. (although that does require that code style changes don't happen. but.))


for Ventriloquism) can use Cantrips as a Wizard
can, albeit in a limited fashion. A gnome can not
use his racial Cantrip to deal damage, to decipher

"can not" → "cannot"

(also, the Races section without, uh, context, containing only gnomes comes off as a bit ??)

[Garryl]

The link for "and here is the result" is to version 1.10, but "download the document" is 1.11 (and broken).

Edit: Wow, it's been a while. I can't believe I lost track of this for so long!

[Ernir]

So you upgraded Paladins and Rangers to 3/4th manifester like new Bard or Psi-warr. Seems a little strong, but then I'm used to having to wait for Paladins to cast so overall not sure.
Well, I believe the classes should be more or less on the same playing field, so... yeah. Since this was a spellcasting overhaul, upgrading the Rangers' and Paladins' spellcasting to something usable was rather high on the prio-list.

But please, let me know if you find/see something specific that you find out of balance.

You work is appreciated.
Thanks! \o/

this thing, was it? (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/19444168/source.zip)

Yup, that thing. Although it does seem to be somewhat out of date right now, the script I'm using to zip and update it is on a computer currently resting in a drawer beneath my bed...


... the paragraph indentation seems to be a bit buggy all over the place, particularly for things like class features.
Do you mean in the source code, or in the compiled document?

In either case, can you point out an example?

(incidentally, do you use, or have you considered using, source control (and making that public)? I, uh, appreciate being able to diff between versions to find what changed. (although that does require that code style changes don't happen. but.))
When I started, I considered it. Ended up deciding it was overkill.

But I didn't immediately anticipate the scope of the thing.

It's over 20k lines now, and over 10 published updates. Not so much overkill any more.

If I get around to it, I'll say so in the thread. :smalltongue:

"can not" → "cannot"
Is "can not" wrong in this instance?

(also, the Races section without, uh, context, containing only gnomes comes off as a bit ??)
Hmm, good point. Better add a heading to the section.

And make a magic elf while I'm at it.

The link for "and here is the result" is to version 1.10, but "download the document" is 1.11 (and broken).
Ooops. Thanks. Fixed.

Edit: Wow, it's been a while. I can't believe I lost track of this for so long!
Yeah, this project has grown old, suddenly. More than two years since I started, now. :smallconfused:

[TuggyNE]

Is "can not" wrong in this instance?

I believe it's universally better to use either can't (informally) or cannot (formally) rather than can not. However, Wiktionary informs me that it's only "often" done that way, rather than always.

Still, as a native English speaker, "can not" just looks wrong. :smallwink:

[Ernir]

I believe it's universally better to use either can't (informally) or cannot (formally) rather than can not. However, Wiktionary informs me that it's only "often" done that way, rather than always.

Still, as a native English speaker, "can not" just looks wrong. :smallwink:
As a non-native speaker, I am not going to contest that. :smalltongue:

*find-replaces about 50 instances of "can not"

[sreservoir]

Yup, that thing. Although it does seem to be somewhat out of date right now, the script I'm using to zip and update it is on a computer currently resting in a drawer beneath my bed...

feh, excuses!


Do you mean in the source code, or in the compiled document?

In either case, can you point out an example?

in the compiled document; blackguard has a nasty case where everything before additional feat is unindented, but from there on, all the class feature descriptions are indented? and archmage, compare before/after high arcana, arcane fire. those probably aren't all of it, but.


When I started, I considered it. Ended up deciding it was overkill.

But I didn't immediately anticipate the scope of the thing.

It's over 20k lines now, and over 10 published updates. Not so much overkill any more.

If I get around to it, I'll say so in the thread. :smalltongue:

all the persons seem never to expect the scope of its things! but then they get huge. (of course, some things don't, but it's hard to make things worse by starting out with source control. possibly not better, but not easily worse.)


Is "can not" wrong in this instance?

if I'm not mistaken, "can not" indicates that one is able to not do a thing (which implies that one can, but is not forced to), whereas "cannot" indicates the inability to do a thing.

[Ernir]

feh, excuses!

I'll get to it. :smalltongue:


in the compiled document; blackguard has a nasty case where everything before additional feat is unindented, but from there on, all the class feature descriptions are indented? and archmage, compare before/after high arcana, arcane fire. those probably aren't all of it, but.
Oh, that.

That's because Unholy Gift and High Arcana are the class feature names, the subsequent paragraphs are the names of the abilities the class feature can grant each time you get it. Compare to Rogue Special Abilities.

In the code, it's \paragraph vs. \subparagraph. I could achieve the same syntax by using item lists. You think that'd be preferable?

[sreservoir]

Oh, that.

That's because Unholy Gift and High Arcana are the class feature names, the subsequent paragraphs are the names of the abilities the class feature can grant each time you get it. Compare to Rogue Special Abilities.

In the code, it's \paragraph vs. \subparagraph. I could achieve the same syntax by using item lists. You think that'd be preferable?

... oh, the bolding was throwing me off; I guess I would have expected subabilities to have been oblique ... or something.

[Ernir]

The source is now available on Github (https://github.com/Ernir/VancianToPsionics). \o/

Also, pushed out a minor update to add the Mystic Theurge. Noticed that I still hadn't added that one! :smalleek:
It was oddly challenging. Mixing spellcasting classes is quite different with spell points.

[Garryl]

I love those pictures!

Cleric has a subject change in Spells Known: "A Cleric begins play knowing two Cleric spells of your choice", should be "his choice".

Dread Knight's Dark Grace should clarify that the bonus is a minimum of +0. I don't think bonuses can be negative, anyways, but it can't hurt.

The footnote about Dragon Disciple regarding loss of class features due to loss of prerequisites contradicts Complete Warrior, which that that you do lose them. Instead, you should probably say that the character continues to qualify for feats, PrCs, and other options as a creature of his original type, maybe? On a related note, shouldn't the PrC requirement of non-dragon be type, not race?

For the Eldritch Knight's Arcane Vigor, what counts as "successfully" using Spellstrike? For example, if your attack hit but you don't successfully cast the spell due to failed concentration or whatever, if you cast the spell but are unable to resolve it against your target, etc.

For the Loremaster's Secret Health, was the intent that the Con mod be 2 higher (+2 hp/HD), or the Con score (+1 hp/HD)? Also, I'd suggest changing it to just giving a straight bonus to hp (or the Improved Toughness Feat, similar to how Newfound Arcana gives the Magically Gifted feat instead of straight spell points).

Might want to change the text of the Metamagician's Focus Specialization. It's (mostly) in second person, whereas the other abilities are all third person. I take it this class is still not complete? It seems somewhat lacking in class features.

Alright. Mystic Theurge time!
(Related) Any reason Practiced Spellcaster got renamed to Continued Training?
Continued Training: Might want to just give this (once) as a bonus feat, period. Otherwise you run into people like me trying to make your life difficult by talking about having 3 spellcasting classes (and, naturally, having taken Continued Training for the one not designated as primary or secondary), or taking Continued Training for both of your classes already, thus getting it as a (redundant) bonus feat twice instead of once and then DCFSing or Psy Reffing or Retraining the originals away for extra feats.
A single bonus feat at level 10 seems odd, but I can roll with it. Also, it's called Bonus Feat on the table and Broadened Horizons in the text.

Oh, hey! I'm in the thanks section. You're welcome.
Speaking of which, don't forget to change the hardcoded year (2012) in the Ogl.tex file regarding your current campaign in a couple of days.

Edit:
Oh, yeah, I was going to say something about the MT's spellcasting before I hit submit.

If you want to simplify the Spells prerequisite, take a page out of ToB (specifically, Shadow Sun Ninja). "Ability to cast both arcane spells and divine spells and ability to cast second-level arcane spells or divine spells".

Intended entry is Wiz 3/Clr 1 (or equivalent). With Cleric using Ardent mechanics and being (almost) assured the Practiced Manifester equivalent, you've got full spell level progression there. End result is the equivalent of 17 levels in each (+14 primary/+16 secondary). CL losses are at ECL 4, 9, and 19, so you get double 9ths at level 20. Not really sure how that plays out, though, especially with Cleric keeping its high level spells.

Note: If you go Wiz 2/Clr 1/Wiz +1, you can actually use Cleric as your primary casting class, giving full progression to Wizard, which means you're only delayed one character level on your spellcasting ultimately, rather than 3. That is MUCH better, but certainly unintended. You can do this due to the Cleric using Ardent mechanics for max spell level (although, unlike the Ardent, the Cleric doesn't force you to pick only 1st level powers at level 1, so you can get away with one Cleric level instead of 2).

Primary spellcasting class designation seems to exist only to give that class the shaft on caster levels. Doesn't seem very "primary" to me. Maybe add in a class feature somewhere that provides a benefit for or with the primary casting class (like if Combined Knowledge only let you use your primary class's ability score for your secondary's, instead of both ways, for example).

[Razanir]

if I'm not mistaken, "can not" indicates that one is able to not do a thing (which implies that one can, but is not forced to), whereas "cannot" indicates the inability to do a thing.

This. "I cannot walk to school" means it's not an option for me to walk; I have to find some other way. "I can not walk to school" means that it's an option to walk, but there are also other options. (It can also imply that I typically walk to school, depending on inflection)

Also, here's some nitpicky advice: Check your alphabetization. "Foresight" should come before the "Form of X" spells.

[Razanir]

Working on my own version of this for Pathfinder. Find off, is it fine if I just take your pdf and change only the stuff that needs changed?

I'll probably start my own thread once I have a bit more than just a Sorcerer. But for now, can I get your opinion on my Sorcerer? Spell points as a Psion/Wilder, spells known as Ernir's Sorcerer, Wild Magic works like a Wilder's Wild Surge, and bloodlines work like Oracle mysteries

[Ernir]

I love those pictures!
Thanks. :smallbiggrin:

Cleric has a subject change in Spells Known: "A Cleric begins play knowing two Cleric spells of your choice", should be "his choice".
Oops.

FYI, the document is probably littered with these. This is one of those things that I can't seem to do intuitively in English.

The footnote about Dragon Disciple regarding loss of class features due to loss of prerequisites contradicts Complete Warrior, which that that you do lose them. Instead, you should probably say that the character continues to qualify for feats, PrCs, and other options as a creature of his original type, maybe?
Hmm, that one again.

By my best reading, the DD Paradox doesn't really exist in the core rules. Core doesn't have the paradox-inducing clause that we have in CWar (and I believe CArc too? Maybe others?), so if the DD Paradox exists, at least it doesn't exist until those supplements came out.
Further, by my understanding, the rules in each 3.5 supplement apply to content within that supplement only unless they specify otherwise (as the Rules Compendium does) - that is, 3.5 uses lexical scoping. This would make the CWar PrCs weird, but since the DD is not a CWar PrC, it should be fine.

This is a lecture I really didn't want to include in the document itself. But still, the question is being asked. Whether that is because I am wrong about this or because a lot of other people have not read as much into this as I have doesn't really matter.

So I guess I'll just include a short clause that makes it explicit in the case of the DD itself. :smalltongue:


On a related note, shouldn't the PrC requirement of non-dragon be type, not race?
Ooo, nice point. This was copied from the SRD, Type is more correct than Race.

For the Eldritch Knight's Arcane Vigor, what counts as "successfully" using Spellstrike? For example, if your attack hit but you don't successfully cast the spell due to failed concentration or whatever, if you cast the spell but are unable to resolve it against your target, etc.
Good question. To be honest, I can't remember what I was thinking at the time.

I'm removing the "successfully" clause. Whatever it was supposed to mean.

For the Loremaster's Secret Health, was the intent that the Con mod be 2 higher (+2 hp/HD), or the Con score (+1 hp/HD)? Also, I'd suggest changing it to just giving a straight bonus to hp (or the Improved Toughness Feat, similar to how Newfound Arcana gives the Magically Gifted feat instead of straight spell points).*
It does say modifier. Comparing it to the others, that's a bit strong.

Changing it to granting Toughness. Also changing Toughness to not suck. :D

Might want to change the text of the Metamagician's Focus Specialization. It's (mostly) in second person, whereas the other abilities are all third person. I take it this class is still not complete? It seems somewhat lacking in class features.
Dread Knight's Dark Grace should clarify that the bonus is a minimum of +0. I don't think bonuses can be negative, anyways, but it can't hurt.
Ah, right. Those are in the sources I uploaded, but no, neither are finished. (Also, I gutted quite a few of the Dread Knight ideas to build the Blackguard.)

If/when I get back to them, I'll take care of it.

Any reason Practiced Spellcaster got renamed to Continued Training?
Renamed? What? Any relation to non-OGL feats are entirely accidental. Yup.


Continued Training: Might want to just give this (once) as a bonus feat, period. Otherwise you run into people like me trying to make your life difficult by talking about having 3 spellcasting classes (and, naturally, having taken Continued Training for the one not designated as primary or secondary), or taking Continued Training for both of your classes already, thus getting it as a (redundant) bonus feat twice instead of once and then DCFSing or Psy Reffing or Retraining the originals away for extra feats.
Hehe.

I could do that.

I think I can also just leave it. If you want to do reshuffling gymnastics or make builds that end up with poor CL progressions or redundant feats, I don't think I'm going to be stopping you anyway.

A single bonus feat at level 10 seems odd, but I can roll with it. Also, it's called Bonus Feat on the table and Broadened Horizons in the text.
THB, that feat is there to make the middle section of the table less empty.

You (or anyone?) have a better idea? :smalltongue:

Speaking of which, don't forget to change the hardcoded year (2012) in the Ogl.tex file regarding your current campaign in a couple of days.
Done!

Intended entry is Wiz 3/Clr 1 (or equivalent). With Cleric using Ardent mechanics and being (almost) assured the Practiced Manifester equivalent, you've got full spell level progression there. End result is the equivalent of 17 levels in each (+14 primary/+16 secondary). CL losses are at ECL 4, 9, and 19, so you get double 9ths at level 20. Not really sure how that plays out, though, especially with Cleric keeping its high level spells.

Note: If you go Wiz 2/Clr 1/Wiz +1, you can actually use Cleric as your primary casting class, giving full progression to Wizard, which means you're only delayed one character level on your spellcasting ultimately, rather than 3. That is MUCH better, but certainly unintended. You can do this due to the Cleric using Ardent mechanics for max spell level (although, unlike the Ardent, the Cleric doesn't force you to pick only 1st level powers at level 1, so you can get away with one Cleric level instead of 2).
You do get double 9ths at level 20 with the basic entry, yes. That's what I intended, for it to be kind of the "capstone" of the class.
Although you do get "full" caster level progression, which is much closer to being as good as full spellcasting progression than it is in vancian, due to how many of the spells scale with augments.

As for how it mixes with the Cleric spellcasting... I've been thinking about it, and the Cleric being the unique snowflake as far as max spell level goes really does muck things up sometimes. Not as much as it might under vancian (again, spells scale with SP expenditure anyway), but still. I'm starting to think I'm placing too much faith in the Ardent...

Primary spellcasting class designation seems to exist only to give that class the shaft on caster levels. Doesn't seem very "primary" to me. Maybe add in a class feature somewhere that provides a benefit for or with the primary casting class (like if Combined Knowledge only let you use your primary class's ability score for your secondary's, instead of both ways, for example).
Heh. You're right. Those names aren't particularly accurate. I'll see what I can do.

Also, here's some nitpicky advice: Check your alphabetization. "Foresight" should come before the "Form of X" spells.
Whoops. Thanks. Fixed.

Working on my own version of this for Pathfinder. Find off, is it fine if I just take your pdf and change only the stuff that needs changed?
Yup, yup. Do what you will. That's what I have those licencing notes for. :smalltongue:

I'll probably start my own thread once I have a bit more than just a Sorcerer. But for now, can I get your opinion on my Sorcerer? Spell points as a Psion/Wilder, spells known as Ernir's Sorcerer, Wild Magic works like a Wilder's Wild Surge, and bloodlines work like Oracle mysteries
PF Wilder Wild Surge still grants a ML increase, right? I'd be careful about that. It's possible to get some slightly level-inappropriate abilities that way.
But that may be what you wanted. I, on the other hand, don't think I've handed out a single CL booster that can increase CL above your HD.

I'm not very familiar with the Oracle Mysteries, but they grant spells known, right? That's also something I haven't been giving out too many of. The 3.5 Wilder may not have enough, but with each spell as big as it is now, it probably isn't very hard to give out too many...

[Razanir]

PF Wilder Wild Surge still grants a ML increase, right? I'd be careful about that. It's possible to get some slightly level-inappropriate abilities that way.
But that may be what you wanted. I, on the other hand, don't think I've handed out a single CL booster that can increase CL above your HD.

I'm not very familiar with the Oracle Mysteries, but they grant spells known, right? That's also something I haven't been giving out too many of. The 3.5 Wilder may not have enough, but with each spell as big as it is now, it probably isn't very hard to give out too many...

I figured that if it wasn't (too) broken for the Wilder to have, it should be safe for a Sorcerer to have. And I only took the abilities from Oracle Mysteries, so it's more like PF Sorcerer Bloodlines, but freeform order of abilities

[Roxxy]

Working on my own version of this for Pathfinder. Find off, is it fine if I just take your pdf and change only the stuff that needs changed?

I'll probably start my own thread once I have a bit more than just a Sorcerer. But for now, can I get your opinion on my Sorcerer? Spell points as a Psion/Wilder, spells known as Ernir's Sorcerer, Wild Magic works like a Wilder's Wild Surge, and bloodlines work like Oracle mysteriesIf you can use any help with this, PM me. I was going to ask about doing this as well, and two heads are superior to one.

[Razanir]

Actually, my Pathfinder version has evolved and become a system of its own. Design goals for my new PF-based system:
-Spells aren't guaranteed to work
-Psionic not Vancian mechanics
-All PC classes get some amount of spellcasting

Classes:
-Bard. Same as before
-Champion. Paladin – alignment restrictions
-Cleric. Actually Cleric + Monk
-Fighter. Borrows from Magus
-Mystic. Similar to UA Cloistered Cleric
-Ninja. Limited magic rogue
-Ranger. As before, but more spellcasting
-Shaman. UA Totem Barbarian + Druid
-Sorcerer. As before
-Wizard. As before

Also, I'll be migrating to a thread of my own soon

[Ernir]

Actually, my Pathfinder version has evolved and become a system of its own. Design goals for my new PF-based system:
-Spells aren't guaranteed to work
-Psionic not Vancian mechanics
-All PC classes get some amount of spellcasting

Classes:
-Bard. Same as before
-Champion. Paladin – alignment restrictions
-Cleric. Actually Cleric + Monk
-Fighter. Borrows from Magus
-Mystic. Similar to UA Cloistered Cleric
-Ninja. Limited magic rogue
-Ranger. As before, but more spellcasting
-Shaman. UA Totem Barbarian + Druid
-Sorcerer. As before
-Wizard. As before

Also, I'll be migrating to a thread of my own soon

Cool beans.

FWIW, I'd recommend setting yourself small, reachable goals when trying for something that huge. It's frightfully easy to give up on projects like this.

[Ernir]

We're up to 1.10c!

Added two pics (Barkskin and AMF). Shuffled a few words around for clarity.

The Death Domain got a high level granted power I rather like. :xykon:

Decided to leave the MT and Cleric mostly alone. If you want non-conventional entry to squeeze out more power, I'm not stopping you (as of this version).

A few other PrC changes were made, mostly in accordance with what I said I'd do above.

Except:

Changing it to granting Toughness. Also changing Toughness to not suck. :D
I went back on this. I changed it to a wording similar to the one Improved Toughness used, but I didn't have Secret Health grant Toughness. (Decided that messing with Toughness was kind of a weird tangent on a spellcasting fix).

Also, I changed Magically Gifted so it can be taken more than once, which completes the series of the Secrets stacking with the obviously corresponding feats. And renamed Magically Gifted to Magical Reservoir. "Gifted" doesn't really say anything about what it does. :smallconfused:

EDIT: Woah, I have Github participation! For two weeks now!
Umm, will figure out how to merge Soon(TM). :smallredface:

[Garryl]

I'm basing my comments on the GitHub version. It's easier to find the changes there than searching through a PDF.

Didn't notice this until now. Mystic Theurge only grants you spell points for the primary class (and at every level), not the secondary, if I'm reading it right. What is the reasoning behind this?

[Ernir]

I'm basing my comments on the GitHub version. It's easier to find the changes there than searching through a PDF.

Excellent.

I really should revise the "versioning" system I've been using up until now, anyway. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense any more.


Didn't notice this until now. Mystic Theurge only grants you spell points for the primary class (and at every level), not the secondary, if I'm reading it right. What is the reasoning behind this?
I wanted the MT to grant an increase in versatility, but I didn't want to make that versatility come with a huge side dose of extra staying power, mostly because now the spell points are fully exchangeable between the classes.

[Ernir]

Umm, will figure out how to merge Soon(TM). :smallredface:
I guess this qualifies as "soon" on the geological scale.

Posting just to say that I finally took the time to (learn how to) merge.

I'm still alive, just busy as **** these days.

[Yora]

Is there any place where we could look at what you've done so far? I'm currently starting doing a similar thing and I think it might really be quite useful to see how you converted certain spells and I might use them for my game.

For other people, this would be blatantly asking to steal your work, but I guess for us homebrewers it's the great success to have other people actually using our stuff. :smallbiggrin:

[Draz74]

Is there any place where we could look at what you've done so far?

Yeah, just go to the OP of this thread and download the PDF Ernir has linked there. People have already been using this system for a while!

[Ernir]

Is there any place where we could look at what you've done so far? I'm currently starting doing a similar thing and I think it might really be quite useful to see how you converted certain spells and I might use them for my game.

For other people, this would be blatantly asking to steal your work, but I guess for us homebrewers it's the great success to have other people actually using our stuff. :smallbiggrin:

Uhh, a full change log? That's kind of long.

The core system has been translated. All the core spellcasting classes and PrCs have been done. The spells have been done, except for those listed at the end of the spellcasting chapter.

Were you looking for something specific? :P

[Yora]

I was looking exactly for the pdf Drazt mentioned. Just what I needed. Already saved me huge amounts of work.

Also like the illustrations and some of the other references.
When I saw the new spell Shun, I immediately said "Shun the nonbeliever! Shuuuuun!". And only then looked at the next page with the description. :smallbiggrin:

[Ernir]

I was looking exactly for the pdf Drazt mentioned. Just what I needed. Already saved me huge amounts of work.

Good to know.

The document's source is over on Github (also linked in the first post), if you want something more copy-paste-able.

[sreservoir]

Good to know.

The document's source is over on Github (also linked in the first post), if you want something more copy-paste-able.

the pdf's text can be copied from, too, although linebreaks and hyphenation will turn out strangely, but I wouldn't say it's less readable than latex source.

[Ernir]

the pdf's text can be copied from, too, although linebreaks and hyphenation will turn out strangely, but I wouldn't say it's less readable than latex source.
My distaste towards pasting from non-plaintext files may not be entirely rational. :P

[sreservoir]

well, you can always run pdftotext on it. like so. (http://sprunge.us/YChE?_) (I cut that one off at 10 kilolines because it's actually kind of long.)

out of curiosity, how do you generally compile the document? I mean, I passed it through latexmk -pdf, but with that much crossreffing going on, the thing looks to need at least three runs to get all the references right, how do you do it?

[Ernir]

well, you can always run pdftotext on it. like so. (http://sprunge.us/YChE?_) (I cut that one off at 10 kilolines because it's actually kind of long.)

out of curiosity, how do you generally compile the document? I mean, I passed it through latexmk -pdf, but with that much crossreffing going on, the thing looks to need at least three runs to get all the references right, how do you do it?

I press the PDFLaTeX button in Kile (http://kile.sourceforge.net/).

And yes, it often runs it three times before it's satisfied. :smalleek:

[sreservoir]

because I, uh, have far too much time, I made a reproduction of the AMF picture (http://sprunge.us/cPUZ?tex) using tikz. (I, uh, took some liberties with the details.)

working demonstration (https://github.com/sreservoir/VancianToPsionics/tree/tikzful) is also available, as well as a standalone rendering (https://dl.dropbox.com/u/86738345/amf.pdf).

[Ernir]

because I, uh, have far too much time, I made a reproduction of the AMF picture (http://sprunge.us/cPUZ?tex) using tikz. (I, uh, took some liberties with the details.)

working demonstration (https://github.com/sreservoir/VancianToPsionics/tree/tikzful) is also available, as well as a standalone rendering (https://dl.dropbox.com/u/86738345/amf.pdf).

You're crazy!

I like it. :smallbiggrin:

[sreservoir]

You're crazy!

I like it. :smallbiggrin:

but of course, isn't it wonderful!

... I have to say, though, it took altogether too much effort -- an hour or thereabouts, for a stick figure illustration. but a lot of that time was spent reading the tikz documentation (I've, uh, never programmed an illustration of vector stick figures before) and fiddling with the sinusoid fragments for the hats. those hats, dammit.

[Raineh Daze]

Hmm. The PDF is distinctly inaccessible for me. Is that something on its end or mine? :smallconfused:

[Ernir]

Hmm. The PDF is distinctly inaccessible for me. Is that something on its end or mine? :smallconfused:

Its end. Dunno what's going on over there. I can access the server directly, but it doesn't seem to like browser connections right now.

In the meantime, try this!
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/19444168/VancianToPsionicsBeta110c.pdf

[Larkas]

Hey, Ernir! I've been thinking, would you care to elaborate on your reasoning behind the SP totals of the classes in this system? Having a formula to figure out how to adapt a class not covered here would be nifty! That way, someone could privately convert other classes, specially those that share spell lists with the ones here (i.e.: the Favored Soul, the Spirit Shaman and the Sha'ir, not to mention the Ur-Priest, the Apostle of Peace, the Sublime Chord, etc.). I figured this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=13323466&postcount=9) out a few months back, but I reckon it would only work with WotC's original variant. Did you use any formulas to figure those out?

[Ernir]

Hey, Ernir! I've been thinking, would you care to elaborate on your reasoning behind the SP totals of the classes in this system? Having a formula to figure out how to adapt a class not covered here would be nifty! That way, someone could privately convert other classes, specially those that share spell lists with the ones here (i.e.: the Favored Soul, the Spirit Shaman and the Sha'ir, not to mention the Ur-Priest, the Apostle of Peace, the Sublime Chord, etc.). I figured this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=13323466&postcount=9) out a few months back, but I reckon it would only work with WotC's original variant. Did you use any formulas to figure those out?

Hmm, well, yes, I suppose there was a process to how the current SP totals developed.
If we look at the first alpha (https://notendur.hi.is/~eth31/ConversionProject/ArcaneToPsionicsAlpha1.pdf), the Wizard is almost a precise copy of the psion, including the point progression, ending up with 343 points. I thought that was a bit high, but I started out assuming that psionics did things right for the most part, so I didn't mess with it.

I *did* mess with it when it came to making a Sorcerer (starting in the first beta (https://notendur.hi.is/~eth31/ConversionProject/ArcaneToPsionicsBeta101.pdf)). I did want to give the Sorcerer more SP than the Wizard, but with the Wizard already having plenty, I came up with new base values for the classes. I decided to base them on simple polynomial equations, and scaled them so that the Wizard would end up with slightly fewer PP than the Psion, and the Sorcerer significantly more.
The equations are on page 12 of the most recent PDF (Under "The Spell Point Reserve" chapter).

In short, the Sor/Wiz/Cleric progressions follow quadratic equations whose coefficients I pulled out of thin air so they would approximately match the Psion progression. It has nothing to do with their original number of spell slots, and can't really be used to extrapolate others. :smallredface:

The Paladin/Ranger progression remains an unmodified PsyWar progression. The Bard got a custom progression, a quadratic equation scaled to fit between the PsyWar progression and the Wiz/Cleric progression.

[Larkas]

Eeep! Well, if you ever come around to formalize that a bit more, please, let us know! :smallsmile:

[ZippoMoon]

Hey can you possibly squeeze in the Archivist class, which happens to be my favorite class to thruge with wizard? It's open source (link at the bottom) so it should be legal. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20051007a&page=3

[Larkas]

Just because it is freely available online doesn't mean that it is open source. It isn't part of the OGC.

[ZippoMoon]

Just because it is freely available online doesn't mean that it is open source. It isn't part of the OGC.

Really? Well...crap!

[Larkas]

Really? Well...crap!

I know, right? :smallfrown:

[NineThePuma]

I would have to check but can't you just steal the Wizard, give him the Cleric's spell list and the Archivist's class features and call it a day?

[bobthe6th]

no, this uses domains like ardent mantels... so they aren't perfectly cross compatible like in normal vancian casting.

Though, a cloistered cleric is workable as an archivist. It loses out on the dark knowledge, but the domains make up for it.

I am interested in seeing a divine sorcerer. Though I guess that is kinda covered by clerics.

also, been playing a Cloistered cleric 2/illusionist 1 in a game... he is weird. Has a stupid amount of random utillaty, and little in combat usefulness(except the DM dosn't press casters with AOOs... so he can spam sleep). Still interesting to see what the system can do.

Random question, but will you be open to adding Homebrew prestige/base classes made/converted for this system?

[NineThePuma]

Maybe it would be easier for him to provide a translation system so that he doesn't have to?

[Ernir]

Hey can you possibly squeeze in the Archivist class, which happens to be my favorite class to thruge with wizard? It's open source (link at the bottom) so it should be legal. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20051007a&page=3
Just because it is freely available online doesn't mean that it is open source. It isn't part of the OGC.
Yup, pretty much what Larkas said. :smallfrown:

Also, a class whose primary feature is "a really really flexible spellbook" is kind of hard to incorporate.

I might end up doing something relating to the concept, but it won't be called an Archivist, and it won't be quite the same.

I am interested in seeing a divine sorcerer. Though I guess that is kinda covered by clerics.
A cha-based 9th-level divine caster could be interesting. So far, my biggest design stumbling block has been to not have it stomp all over the Paladin.

will you be open to adding Homebrew prestige/base classes made/converted for this system?
One of the main things I have on my back burner (where it's been cooking for a while, this semester has been HELL :smallfrown:) is to restructure the document to make it easier to add such things without breaking the flow of updated SRD content too badly.

In other words, yes.

Maybe it would be easier for him to provide a translation system so that he doesn't have to?
I don't think so. If I thought there exists a good way to systematically convert material like that, I wouldn't have gone on the rewriting spree. =/

[Draz74]

One of the main things I have on my back burner (where it's been cooking for a while, this semester has been HELL :smallfrown:) is to restructure the document to make it easier to add such things without breaking the flow of updated SRD content too badly.

I think if you want your homebrew to continue its slow but viral spreading through the D&D community, it may be a wise idea (from a marketing perspective) to leave the main PDF covering mostly just classes/spell lists that were "Core" in D&D, and make a supplementary PDF for adaptations of non-Core or homebrew material.

Though it would be nice if the supplementary material was still hyperlinked to the spell descriptions from your Core book.

[Ernir]

I think if you want your homebrew to continue its slow but viral spreading through the D&D community, it may be a wise idea (from a marketing perspective) to leave the main PDF covering mostly just classes/spell lists that were "Core" in D&D, and make a supplementary PDF for adaptations of non-Core or homebrew material.

Though it would be nice if the supplementary material was still hyperlinked to the spell descriptions from your Core book.

I've been reluctant to split the document up so far due to me not knowing how to do cross-document hyperlinks. There seems to be some support for it in LaTeX (http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/14364/cross-referencing-between-different-files), but yeah, so far no experience with it.

The structure I have on my computer right now is like so (http://i.imgur.com/9BAcYpq.png). I like thinking it's not in the way, but yes, I agree, never downloading the new content should optimally be entirely optional. I don't have any illusions about there being a similar demand for my original creations as there seems to be for this fix, or it being a good idea to promote my original work by forcibly strapping it on my more popular work. :smalltongue:


EDIT: I am also thinking it might be time to just bite the damn bullet and write a d20srd.com-esque site.

[The Boz]

I love this.
I love this SO MUCH.
Ernir, sir, have an internet.

[Draz74]

EDIT: I am also thinking it might be time to just bite the damn bullet and write a d20srd.com-esque site.

That's what I eventually concluded about my own homebrew system. So yeah, I recommend Wikispaces if you aren't already an expert in some other type of website.

[Ernir]

I love this.
I love this SO MUCH.
Ernir, sir, have an internet.

Whoo! Thank you!


That's what I eventually concluded about my own homebrew system. So yeah, I recommend Wikispaces if you aren't already an expert in some other type of website.

Hmm, I'm hardly an expert in any kind of website creation. I can hack until it looks like it's created slightly after 1995, but yeah.

My problem with wikis and similar solutions (for a project of this scope) is mostly that the browser-based editors they provide are so very limited compared to what I've been spoiled with. Really, the biggest reason I still stick with LaTeX might be how easy it is to manage multiple documents (comes with any decent editor) and handle internal cross-references (provided by LaTeX, and not by plain HTML. :smallannoyed:).

Let's see what I end up with.

I've been decently active for the last month or so (although not for the last week). Will probably recompile and publish soonish.


Also, heads up: I'm moving on from the university I've been studying/teaching at (at least for now), so the PDF host is moving on too sometime in the next year.

[Yora]

Ernir, how are you handling metamagic feats?

I am seriously considering dropping them completely, as most spells come with augmentation options for free, and Expanded knowledge to gain more spells known always seems a better feat than any metamagic feat could be.

[Ernir]

Ernir, how are you handling metamagic feats?

I am seriously considering dropping them completely, as most spells come with augmentation options for free, and Expanded knowledge to gain more spells known always seems a better feat than any metamagic feat could be.

They work like metapsionic feats. Increase spell point cost, usually by (comparable MM feat slot adjustment - 1)*2 and expend your focus. I translated the core metapsionic feats, splatbook metapsionic feats should be more or less directly applicable.

As for whether they are a good idea... I have been wondering if metamagic should have been done entirely within the spell system to begin with. A metamagic system does give more room to fiddle, but it's a kind of complicated approach.

[TuggyNE]

As for whether they are a good idea... I have been wondering if metamagic should have been done entirely within the spell system to begin with. A metamagic system does give more room to fiddle, but it's a kind of complicated approach.

How would you handle things like Transdimensional Spell or Burrowing Power without metamagic? Empower, Maximize, Energy Admixture, and similar things also seem useful and not entirely subsumed by standard augmentation.

[Draz74]

How would you handle things like Transdimensional Spell or Burrowing Power without metamagic? Empower, Maximize, Energy Admixture, and similar things also seem useful and not entirely subsumed by standard augmentation.

On the contrary, Empower and Maximize seem exactly like the kind of metamagic that becomes superfluous in a system with augmentable spells. (They're notably not very popular metapsionic feats.)

But I think there's other effects (possibly including Burrowing or Energy Admixture) that are oddball enough that not every caster should be able to add them to a spell just by pumping more power into it, which are therefore good candidates for metamagic in this system.

[TuggyNE]

On the contrary, Empower and Maximize seem exactly like the kind of metamagic that becomes superfluous in a system with augmentable spells. (They're notably not very popular metapsionic feats.)

I don't know how popular they are, since I've never built a blasting psion, but there's enough of a difference between augmenting to full ML and Empowering or Maximizing that at high ML, the feats give an advantage. I forget how much it is though. :smallconfused:


But I think there's other effects (possibly including Burrowing or Energy Admixture) that are oddball enough that not every caster should be able to add them to a spell just by pumping more power into it, which are therefore good candidates for metamagic in this system.

Yeah. Chain, Delay, Twin, Split Ray, and maybe Unconditional are other interesting effects.

[Ernir]

How would you handle things like Transdimensional Spell or Burrowing Power without metamagic? Empower, Maximize, Energy Admixture, and similar things also seem useful and not entirely subsumed by standard augmentation.

Mmm, that is something that would be largely lost.

Perhaps what we really need is just a definition of what belongs in an augment and what belongs in a feat.


there's enough of a difference between augmenting to full ML and Empowering or Maximizing that at high ML, the feats give an advantage. I forget how much it is though.

I've done some math on it. The feats are... kind of crap. I actually included one table on it next to the Maximize feat in the PDF. :smalltongue:

[TuggyNE]

Mmm, that is something that would be largely lost.

Perhaps what we really need is just a definition of what belongs in an augment and what belongs in a feat.

Yeah, the trick is, I think, that feats should have unusual but widely applicable tricks that can be safely applied to any spell/power that qualifies, while augments should include the basic functionality and some tweaks and customizations. You shouldn't need metamagic to make decent use of spells, but it should make things noticeably better.


I've done some math on it. The feats are... kind of crap. I actually included one table on it next to the Maximize feat in the PDF. :smalltongue:

I think that's what I'm remembering, actually. :smallconfused: :smalltongue:

[Ernir]

Looks like I have lost write permissions to the Uni server already.
But Beta 1.11 is done anyway, and up on the "backup server"! :smalltongue: (linky) (http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/19444168/VancianToPsionicsBeta111.pdf)

I think the most immediately noticeable change is just the way the document is structured. This is what the changes look like:
http://i.imgur.com/h3S2SFj.png
(Note: the one on the right is more expanded)

"New Spellcasting Classes" also contains a new spellcasting class, which I think is now fiiiinally ready for prime time. The Spellbreaker. And yes, Warcraft 3 was the inspiration. :smalltongue:

Also a new domain. A player in a game I am playing in (whoo!) wanted to play a priest of the money god. Also moved the Moon domain and some assorted doodads I have made over to that section, to maintain as much core purity in the main part of the PDF as I can.

[Ernir]

It's been almost a year. Who thought I had given up on this?

Well, I didn't. Not yet.

For this tiny little update, I mostly have a few new old spells. I also finally decided to ship the Wild Ranger, it's not getting any better here on my drives.

Those who have been following very closely (hah!) may have noticed that the version history wasn't online there for a few months, and that the "current version" just linked to a public Dropbox file.

Well, the current version can be found here (http://ernir.net/static/content/VtP/VancianToPsionicsBeta111b.pdf) now. Those who wish to see the old versions can do so on this webpage (http://ernir.net/vanciantopsionics/). Even if I have to switch servers some day (this is hosted on a VPS), I sincerely hope the URL will stay the same for a bit.

[Eldest]

It's been almost a year. Who thought I had given up on this?

*waves* I did! Or at least I thought you were done.

By the way I've been paying attention to this the entire time and I think this is the first time actually posting here so I like the work. :smallsmile:

[Adam1949]

It's been almost a year. Who thought I had given up on this?

Well, I didn't. Not yet.

For this tiny little update, I mostly have a few new old spells. I also finally decided to ship the Wild Ranger, it's not getting any better here on my drives.

Those who have been following very closely (hah!) may have noticed that the version history wasn't online there for a few months, and that the "current version" just linked to a public Dropbox file.

I've been following! I really love your work, it's been such a help teaching some of my friends how to play d20. You see, a couple of them are only familiar with RPG games if they're on a console, and thus they're used to an MP bar or other such method. This has helped me immensely in getting them comfortable with magic in 3.X. Thank you so much!

My question is, does this port over to Pathfinder well? Or would it need a bit of work in order to do that?

[NineThePuma]

Love the system! :smallbiggrin:

My only disappointment is that it's really hard to do a blasty cleric. :smallmad:

[Ernir]

*waves* I did! Or at least I thought you were done.

By the way I've been paying attention to this the entire time and I think this is the first time actually posting here so I like the work. :smallsmile:
I've been following! I really love your work, it's been such a help teaching some of my friends how to play d20. You see, a couple of them are only familiar with RPG games if they're on a console, and thus they're used to an MP bar or other such method. This has helped me immensely in getting them comfortable with magic in 3.X. Thank you so much!
Whoo! Means much to me to hear that. :smallsmile:


My question is, does this port over to Pathfinder well? Or would it need a bit of work in order to do that?
I honestly don't know, I am not that familiar with Pathfinder.

I guess that the biggest challenge would be setting the classes up to support the archetype system.

Over the years, I have received at two offers to port the project. Searching backwards to see how far those went, I think this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?266229-Psionic-Mechanics-for-Spellcasting-(PF-PEACH)) is the farthest anyone has gone. Don't know whether that's because porting work is difficult or not interesting. :smalltongue:


Love the system! :smallbiggrin:

My only disappointment is that it's really hard to do a blasty cleric. :smallmad:

Hmm, we've got to be able to do something about that!

Are you comparing the difficulty to the difficulty of creating non-Cleric blasters? What options do you think are missing when compared to the other classes?

As is, I think it's very easy to give any Cleric at least a bit of blast-ability, but perhaps making a focused blaster really is too hard, especially in the level 3-6 range. Hmm.

[NineThePuma]

I didn't really do a full read of "every single blasting spell" in the book, but at a glance, the Magic domain, Fire domain, and... I think I also glanced at War and Destruction domains, didn't particularly have a lot of low level blasty potential. Or a lot of blasty utility.

I was trying to build a character archetype that was awkward and weird (Emulating a pseudo-SOLDIER from FF7, specifically Kunsel, who is a Knowledge Oriented Gish) and was running into the issue of Wizard being a terrible choice for that (even with shenanigans) and Cleric not being able to show the breadth of blasting that I would expect. It really made me sad, because every class in this book is excellent, but none could manage. Cleric managed, just barely, and I was going to have to poke around in the expanded domain list and see if I could find something that would give me an excuse to have a suitable breadth of blasting with one or two domains to cover the gaps.

[Ernir]

Okay, let's see what damage options we have already.

The ones I considered fundamental:

Energized Touch (Sor/Wiz 1). Touch deals SP*(d8+small modifier) points of damage, selectable damage type.
Magic Missile (Sor/Wiz 1, Magic 1). Missile deals 1d4+1 points of force damage, no save, no miss, no nothing. Additional missile per 2 SP.
Scorching Ray (Sor/Wiz 1). RTA to deal SP*(d6+small modifier) points of damage, selectable damage type.
Fireball (Evoker 2). 20' radius burst, SP*(d6+small modifier) points of damage. A difficult saving throw.
Lightning bolt (Evoker 2). Like Fireball, but in a line.

Some others:

Acid Arrow (Sor/Wiz 2). RTA to deal 2d4 points of acid damage. Lasts an additional round per 2 SP spent. (Note: Wow, that's bad.)
Call Lightning (Air 3, Destruction 3). Call down Lightning Bolts that basically deal 3d6 points of damage, +1d6 per 2 SP. (Note: SP-efficient, but also bad...)
Chain Lightning (Evoker 6). SP*d6 points of selectable damage to lots of targets.
Cone of Cold (Evoker 5). 60' cone, SP*d6 points of selectable damage and slow. (Note: Didn't remember I gave this one damage selection. Might be overkill...)
Disintegrate (Destruction 6, Sor/Wiz 6). Lots of damage, Fort save for small damage, yadda yadda.
Fire Seeds (Fire 6). Lots of fire damage potential, very limited application.
Fire Storm (Fire 7). Very large area of boring old SP*d6 points fire damage. (Note: This doesn't really deserve its level, I think. There's not enough going on here.)
Flame Strike (Fire 4, Sun 4, War 4). SP*(d6) points of fire damage and knocks prone. (Note: If there were a fundamental Cleric blasting spell, I think this would be it.)
Flaming Sphere (Sor/Wiz 2, Fire 2). 2d6 points of fire damage for 1 round/level, no save. Quirky mechanics.
Horrid Wilting (Necromancer 8, Water 8). Targeted living creatures take SP*d6 points of damage and are Fatigued. (Note: I think this one's level is too high for "just" Fatigue, or Exhaustion with Augment. Thinking about lowering its level.)
Inflict Wounds (Destruction 1). Let's face it, this one is for healing undead...
Magic Stone (Earth 1). RTA to deal 1d6+1 points of damage. Double damage to undead. Additional stone per 2 SP.
Polar Ray (Evoker 8). RTA to deal SP*d6 points of cold damage and freeze the target, no save!.
Produce Flame (Fire 1). Decent damage, but spread out over lots of attack actions.
Squirt (Water 2). SP*d6 damage in a line, but it's nonlethal.
Shout (Bard 4, Sor/Wiz 4). 30' cone, SP*d6 Sonic damage and deafness. Fort save for half and negate deafness. (Note: I think this one's pretty good!)
Wall of Fire (Sor/Wiz 4). Lots of damage, largely contingent on someone walking through.
Woodbolt (Plant 1). SP*d6 points of damage, no save, no SR, by succeeding on a normal ranged attack.


Then there are quite a few who technically deal damage, but wouldn't ever be worth it weren't it for the secondary effects (Freezing Sphere, Inflict Wounds, Vampiric Touch, etc.).


Anyway.

I think the thing I have to learn here is that even if Clerics have access to quite a few damaging spells (some of them even good), they are missing the staples. So even if you build a Cleric that can blow stuff up, it's hard to build a Cleric whose routine answer to problems is to blow them up.

The solution I'm thinking of right now is as follows:


Make the "generic" damage spells far more widely available. A spell like Energy Ball (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/energyBall.htm) would be on the Sor/Wiz list (Fireball is currently only on the Evoker list) and on something like the Magic Domain for Clerics.
Turn some of the currently awkwardly named spells (Cone of "Cold", "Fire"ball, and so many others) into more specialized spells, and create more specialized spells.


It should make it much easier for most casters to get a "whatever" blasting spell, and hopefully allow dedicated blasters to have the perfect blast spell for more situations.

Am I on to something?

[NineThePuma]

I think having generic blasting spells available easily while having much more specialized versions that are more niche but stronger would be a good move.

I'll admit that of the non-fundamental spells, the only ones I looked for when designing were Flamestrike, Chain Lightning, Cone of Cold, and Disintegrate. Seeing you list them out shows a number of "okay" options that aren't immediately thought of, but aren't necessarily bad, just spread out, and spending precious Domain slots on them might not be desirable depending on what they're attached to.

[DeAnno]

I'm looking through this, and I'm really pleasantly surprised at how reasonable everything feels. So far the only really concerning thing is how the Scry and Die feat is a little setting-ravaging. Even if the feat is only usable once per Scry attempt (I'm not sure from the reading), augmenting Scry means you can nick someone of comparable level to death from across the world and it's kind of hard to do anything about it.

Of course Nondetection scales at double speed if you augment it, and Mind Blank ultimately solves the problem entirely, but I'm not sure if that sort of implied paranoia being absolutely necessary was intentional.

EDIT: Rules Queries
1) Can you expend your magical focus for multiple things at once, if they affect the same spell? For example, can you cast an Empowered Maximized Fireball (the metamagic average damage table implies you can)? How about a Careful Pushed Empowered Maximized Fireball?
2) Does applying a metamagic feat to a spell lower its save DC by sucking away spell points? That table from before implies it does, but the rules as written are sort of vague on the matter (to me it seems like it shouldn't, since the points are still spent on the spell).

[Ernir]

I think having generic blasting spells available easily while having much more specialized versions that are more niche but stronger would be a good move.

I'll admit that of the non-fundamental spells, the only ones I looked for when designing were Flamestrike, Chain Lightning, Cone of Cold, and Disintegrate. Seeing you list them out shows a number of "okay" options that aren't immediately thought of, but aren't necessarily bad, just spread out, and spending precious Domain slots on them might not be desirable depending on what they're attached to.
I've begun work in this direction. Reorganizing the spell lists is going to be the fun/tough part.

Also, going to improve a few of those slightly-less-than-OK spells. :smallyuk:

I'm looking through this, and I'm really pleasantly surprised at how reasonable everything feels.
I made it to be reasonable.
What I'm surprised at is that people actually seem to agree! :smalltongue:

Thanks.

So far the only really concerning thing is how the Scry and Die feat is a little setting-ravaging. Even if the feat is only usable once per Scry attempt (I'm not sure from the reading), augmenting Scry means you can nick someone of comparable level to death from across the world and it's kind of hard to do anything about it.

Of course Nondetection scales at double speed if you augment it, and Mind Blank ultimately solves the problem entirely, but I'm not sure if that sort of implied paranoia being absolutely necessary was intentional.
Ah! The origins of that feat are kind of interesting.

Rarely-mentioned fact: The feat is built into the psionic "scrying" power (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/remoteViewing.htm).

I consider myself to have nerfed the option and made it less available, by making it cost a feat. :smalltongue:


EDIT: Rules Queries
1) Can you expend your magical focus for multiple things at once, if they affect the same spell? For example, can you cast an Empowered Maximized Fireball (the metamagic average damage table implies you can)? How about a Careful Pushed Empowered Maximized Fireball?
2) Does applying a metamagic feat to a spell lower its save DC by sucking away spell points? That table from before implies it does, but the rules as written are sort of vague on the matter (to me it seems like it shouldn't, since the points are still spent on the spell).

Expending your Focus gives you only one benefit. To cast something like and Empowered Maximized Fireball, you'd need to obtain two focuses, which you can do via the Spellstaff Containment feat.
SP spent on metamagic do not count towards the spell's save DC.


Both of these are actually inheritance from the psionic system. :smalltongue:

In fact, mitigating the second factor was my biggest systematic change. In psionics, augments don't count towards the spell save DC either, by default.

[Ernir]

Happy holidays!

News: I'm making a website.


http://i.imgur.com/IhifH6K.png


SoonTM

[NineThePuma]

This is the best christmas present yet! :D

[Zireael]

This is the best christmas present yet! :D

Agreed completely!

Mind if I borrow this idea for my OGL roguelike?

[Ernir]

Thanks, people. :)


Mind if I borrow this idea for my OGL roguelike?

Go ahead!

[Kamai]

I'm starting to look through some of the spells, starting with Faerie Fire. Here's my thoughts:
Faerie Fire: The fact that you used linear scaling here doesn't seem right to me. While at early levels, it's fine, it probably should scale up faster than +2 5ft blasts/spell level. Maybe a 2pp augment that increases the radius of all bursts by 5 feet? Still not amazing fully scaled, but should still have a use.

False Life: With the existence of Vigor for Psions, I don't see why you needed to nerf this spell (a 3rd level Wizard was getting 1d10 + 3) to add scaling on the level of a cure spell.

Fireball: The 1 for 1 scaling for PP was a notable accident/errata on energy stun. Do you think it's fair to do here just because Fireball does nothing but damage?

Fire Seeds: Was it intended for it to start higher than 1d6/caster level (13d6 at 11th)? If so, it probably should slightly faster than 1 to 1 (i.e. For every 3 points spent augmenting this, add an additional d6 damage).

Flame Blade: I'm surprised that there's not a 1 hour/level augment.

I'll definitely keep going on this later.

[Ernir]

Faerie Fire: The fact that you used linear scaling here doesn't seem right to me. While at early levels, it's fine, it probably should scale up faster than +2 5ft blasts/spell level. Maybe a 2pp augment that increases the radius of all bursts by 5 feet? Still not amazing fully scaled, but should still have a use.
Hmm.

It scales a lot better than normal Faerie Fire (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/faerieFire.htm) (that is to say, it scales), but the eventual "problem" is that the core FF effect just isn't very... spectacular. I don't think increasing the area more is the way to go.

Are there any other side effects that could be appropriate for the spell?

False Life: With the existence of Vigor for Psions, I don't see why you needed to nerf this spell (a 3rd level Wizard was getting 1d10 + 3) to add scaling on the level of a cure spell.
I must have thought I was buffing it by giving it the augment. :smalltongue:

It should be weaker than Vigor due to the duration factor. Hours/level makes it much more useful as a pre-buff. I expect most casters who know False Life to have it up most of the time.

That being said, it probably is a bit lame. Let's put the +1/level back!

Fireball: The 1 for 1 scaling for PP was a notable accident/errata on energy stun. Do you think it's fair to do here just because Fireball does nothing but damage?
Pretty much, yes. Finding a niche for good old Fireball is a bit difficult. I thought this was an interesting way to make it a more reliable source of damage.

That being said, I intend to change it a bit in the next version. I'm making a more generally accessible "Energy Ball" spell (which gets the flexible damage types), and an Evoker-specific "Fireball" spell (which gets the crazy save scaling). I did this in response to the discussions on Cleric blasting earlier this year.


Fire Seeds: Was it intended for it to start higher than 1d6/caster level (13d6 at 11th)? If so, it probably should slightly faster than 1 to 1 (i.e. For every 3 points spent augmenting this, add an additional d6 damage).
Nope, that's just a bug. Should be 11d6 to start with.


Flame Blade: I'm surprised that there's not a 1 hour/level augment.
I guess I just didn't think of it at the time. But a good idea!

Sounds like it'd be awkward to keep around, though (who has an asbestos sheath?). I should couple it with an ability to turn the thing off.


I'll definitely keep going on this later.

Thanks! Critical reading is always highly appreciated. It's the only way this gets better.

[Kamai]

Flame Strike: It was half divine half fire in 3.5. Was this a miscopy, or did you just decide to go with the knockdown effect to have less cleric blasting?

Dispel Magic: This scales a lot faster than standard dispel magic, being based both on caster level and +2/3 pp. I'm not sure off hand what would make it more appropriate, but I understand why you might not be a fan of Dispel Psionics' pattern (d20 + pp spent), but I don't think busting higher level caster's spells is the right way to go. Maybe +4pp for an area dispel being able to dispel 1 more spell on each creature or object in area?

Fortune of the Gods: At 1 round/level, and personal, I have my doubts it's a 9th level spell, but I can't quite put a finger on where I think it should go. Maybe after sleeping on it.

Freezing Sphere: Maybe not necessary, but a 1 point augment for +10ft radius of frozen water?

Gentle Repose: There's no reason that a generic cleric should not be able to use this spell to keep a body safe for resurrection.

Giant Vermin: While I understand that you're borrowing the scaling from the original spell, I'm not convinced that Garganutan vermin are a high 7th level spell, and that Colossal ones are high "10th" level spells. +2 for Large, +4 for Huge, +6 for Gargantuan, +8 for Colossal makes more sense to me, especially since this is a specialist spell in the first place. Remember they still don't get languages or complicated commands, or even spell-likes like Summon Monsters. They are just big moving walls that can attack.

Faerie Fire/Glitterdust: Just an odd thought, how about combining these 2 spells. If you keep the extra burst/CL, then you have a spell at 11PP (True Seeing) that is limited by area, but doesn't rely on multiple castings or having 1 person be a spotter to point out invisible creatures and similar, but has very limited, very clearly marked areas to show, and doesn't do anything about polymorph. Still wouldn't scale up perfectly, but I think there'd be some element of choice.

Horrid Wilting: Don't forget to specify the +d8 instead of +d6 for plant creatures on the augment.

Imbue with Spell Ability: The wording that you lose the spells you taught nerfs this spell a lot, and I'm not sure if that's what you intended, especially with psion-like amounts of known spells. Just locking out the 14 points is enough (and is more than what 3.5's Imbue with Spell Ability required).

[Ernir]

Flame Strike: It was half divine half fire in 3.5. Was this a miscopy, or did you just decide to go with the knockdown effect to have less cleric blasting?

Ah, that. The half divine part got merged into the Fire domain itself as a granted power. Thought more spells could benefit from that.

Also, it's elective, so Frost Worms can now be blasted for increased effect.


Dispel Magic: This scales a lot faster than standard dispel magic, being based both on caster level and +2/3 pp. I'm not sure off hand what would make it more appropriate, but I understand why you might not be a fan of Dispel Psionics' pattern (d20 + pp spent), but I don't think busting higher level caster's spells is the right way to go. Maybe +4pp for an area dispel being able to dispel 1 more spell on each creature or object in area?
The way Dispel Psionics is handled bugs me.

The way it's currently in the document bugs me too, to be honest. I've gone a bit back and forward on that spell - I still haven't found a way to implement this really important core spell in a way that makes it scale sanely.

I think you may expect a whole re-implementation (again) at some point in the future. =/

Fortune of the Gods: At 1 round/level, and personal, I have my doubts it's a 9th level spell, but I can't quite put a finger on where I think it should go. Maybe after sleeping on it.
Well, it's mostly there because I stole Miracle away from the Luck domain. Hardly my proudest moment of game design, but I wanted it to have a 9th level spell. :smalltongue:

As for balance, the canny reader may see that it's comparable in power to the non-OGL 9th level Destiny domain spell. Ahem.

Freezing Sphere: Maybe not necessary, but a 1 point augment for +10ft radius of frozen water?

Hmm. No, I think I'm content with letting Widen Spell cover that one.



Gentle Repose: There's no reason that a generic cleric should not be able to use this spell to keep a body safe for resurrection.

Hmm, the reason it's there is that I merged it with the Clone spell... mostly on the basis that neither really gets selected enough.

As is, the Clone augment is probably the translation's most verbose one.

I'll revisit it.



Giant Vermin: While I understand that you're borrowing the scaling from the original spell, I'm not convinced that Garganutan vermin are a high 7th level spell, and that Colossal ones are high "10th" level spells. +2 for Large, +4 for Huge, +6 for Gargantuan, +8 for Colossal makes more sense to me, especially since this is a specialist spell in the first place. Remember they still don't get languages or complicated commands, or even spell-likes like Summon Monsters. They are just big moving walls that can attack.

Hmm, I always thought the standard spell was rather good, so I didn't mess with it - but CLs scaled differently in normal 3.5.

I'll do some comparisons with other spells.


Faerie Fire/Glitterdust: Just an odd thought, how about combining these 2 spells. If you keep the extra burst/CL, then you have a spell at 11PP (True Seeing) that is limited by area, but doesn't rely on multiple castings or having 1 person be a spotter to point out invisible creatures and similar, but has very limited, very clearly marked areas to show, and doesn't do anything about polymorph. Still wouldn't scale up perfectly, but I think there'd be some element of choice.


Interesting!

I could also just make "blinding" as an augment on Faerie Fire. Probably easier, and more fluff-consistent.



Horrid Wilting: Don't forget to specify the +d8 instead of +d6 for plant creatures on the augment.

Nice catch! Thanks.



Imbue with Spell Ability: The wording that you lose the spells you taught nerfs this spell a lot, and I'm not sure if that's what you intended, especially with psion-like amounts of known spells. Just locking out the 14 points is enough (and is more than what 3.5's Imbue with Spell Ability required).

Hmm, good point. I don't think it has been brought up before, but yes, I may have been too restrictive there.

[peterpaulrubens]

The way Dispel Psionics is handled bugs me.

The way it's currently in the document bugs me too, to be honest. I've gone a bit back and forward on that spell - I still haven't found a way to implement this really important core spell in a way that makes it scale sanely.

I think you may expect a whole re-implementation (again) at some point in the future. =/

I'd be in favor of something like 2pp spent for a +1 boost. That scales slightly slower (1/2 vs. 2/3) but still allows a puncher's chance of popping spells cast by really high level enemies, which is a feature I've always really liked about Dispel Magic.

[Ernir]

My latest thought is to just revert to the original psionic version.

It's not perfect, but at least that way it's familiar...

Another thought was to make it the same, but add another, less efficient, but uncapped augment to it. So you can get fast scaling to +20, then you're bleeding lots of PP to further increase the bonus. Or just make related feats and/or class features.

[Vermithrax]

This is amazing and I love it! There is just one thing that bothers me.

I notice that few of your item creation and usage rules explicitly mention using spell points. I notice the rules on using spell points to recharge wands and other spell storing magic items, and I would assume that casting a spell from a scroll incurs the normal spell point cost of the spell each time you cast it from the description. However, am I correct that any other magic item usages do not require the user to spend spell points and that the days spent crafting these items are assumed not to be adventuring days during which the caster's spell point reserve could be used (they are instead all invested in the item being crafted)?

I ask because I think requiring spell point expenditures could be a way to make metamagic rods function properly without being free. Think of it like a resistor in the magical "circuit" of casting the spell; you have to add more power to overcome it, but in doing so you change the spell's effects. Thus in the same way buying a scroll is like buying an "Expanded Knowledge" feat, buying such a metamagic rod would be like buying a metamagic feat (especially if they are similarly fragile).

You could even go a step further and add metamagic matrices that give a one-time use of the feat when you spend the additional required spell points on the spell you use it with, before being destroyed.

Both types of metamagic items would automatically be incompatible with other spell storing magic items, due to your "one source of spell points" rule, but would need an additional rule to make sure they do not allow you to bypass the caster level restriction on how many spell points can be spent on a given spell.

[Xzoltar]

I have comment a Long Long time ago, but here's another shot of commentary :

I know that you have made lot of spell restricted to Domains or Wizard School Specialisation and I like that, I think however that some of thoses spells should be able to be use by Priest/Wizard as a spell of +2 spell level that way you still have an advantage if you have the right specialisation/domain.

Adapt Body : For every additional spell point you spend, this spell can affect an additional target within range.

Aligned Protection : Should only affect Ally

Aligned Sword : Should only affect Ally

Align Water : For 2 spell point you spend, this spell can affect an additional flask of water

Animal Shapes : Seem like a strange metamagic spell, could maybe add a Augment to affect more target to the other spells instead

Animate Dead : Augmentation to allow to Animate Greater Skeletons and Zombies

Antimagic Field : If you spend 6 additional spell points, the antimagic field is centered on a target within Short Range, rather than moving with you. That target is allowed a Saving Throw to Negate the soell.

Arrow of Death : If you spend 4 additional spell points, this spell’s duration increases to 24 hours or until the arrow hit a target.

Assault of the Sevenfold Heaven : Think it fit more as a Wizard spell and be Called Prismatic Weapon

Awaken Nature's Wrath : Seem Way Overpowered it deal lot of damage and the Area of Effect is Massive, this should probably be Epic compare to Earthquake from lvl 7 to 9 for the duration seem good without the Massive AoE

Burn : Too Powerful, deal 35 dmg with Fireball and the target suffer 17 dmg for the next 5 turn ? For a level 1 spell ?

Burning Hands : The Spell dont exist but you got a picture of it on page 154 ?

Clairvoyance : If you spend 6 additional spell points, the scrying allow you to use magically or supernaturally enhanced senses

Consecrate/Desecrate : Should have a way to make this permanent. Not sure it should be restriced to Good Domain, maybe also Cleric 4-5 because a priest dedicated to a Deity fighting Undead should be able to cast this without having to get the Good domain

Detect Poison : For each 1 additional spell points you spend you can affect 1 more target

Dweomer Blockade : Sound like a good Abjurer spell too, I would add Abjurer 6

Dweomer Rip : Could also make a very Good Abjurer Spell, I would add Abjurer 3

Floating Disk : For every 2 spell point you spend, te Disk increase in size by 1ft. For every 4 spell point you spend, te Disk can hold 25% more pounds.

Form of the Celestial/Elemental/Fiend : Why no augment like the other Form Spells ?

Genesis : For every additional spell point you spend, this spell maximum radius increase by 10ft

Gust of Wind : For every additional spell point you spend, the Strength Check DC increase by +1 and the wind speed by 5 mph

Hall of Mirrors : For every additional spell point you spend, you may affect an additional target

Halt Undead : I see no reason this spell should have an augmentation to affect non-undead unit, you have Hold person for that

Hand of Force : Look like a stronger version but think level 4 is a little high for a spell that dont do much and with a duration very low. If you spend 2 additional spell points, the duration increase to 1 min / caster level

Hardening : With no Component or xp cost this spell should have something like : No object can be affected by a Hardening spell more than once, the stronger of the two casting remain

Helping Hand : For every additional 3 spell point you spent you can materialize 1 additionnal hand

Ice Storm : For every 2 additional spell point you spend, the Bludgeoning and Cold damage increase by +1d6

Immortal Army : Way too strong this is Epic with no cost to make an invincible army ? At least reduce it to something like Resist All 1 / Caster level, this will make the Army still out of reach from most threat except very strong opponent, the other Army can't do nothing against yours

Implosion : Should add You can target a particular creature only once with each casting of the spell.

Interposing Hand : For every 1 additional spell point you spend, the hand can affect target of +200 pounds

Invisibility Purge : minor correction : the duration of this spell becomes Permanent rather than 1 min/level

Magic Missile : I think the spell dont do enough damage with augmentation. Would change it to : For every 1 additional spell points you spend, you gain an additional missile. I would prefer that the spell still scale with level of to 5 Missile for free and then you could maybe pay 2 Spell Point for each other missile

Maze : If you spend 4 additional spell points, the creature cannot use any Plane Shifting of Teleporting spell to escape the Maze.target. For every 4 spell point you spend, you may affect an additional target

Meteor : The damage is only "raw" damage ? Should Damage Reduction apply ? Maybe Half-Fire and Half-Bludgeoning ?

Power Word : should read 200> instead of 200<

Remove Blindness/Deafness / Remove Curse / Remove Disease / Remove Fear / Remove Paralysis : For every two additional spell points you spend, this spell can affect an additional creature. No two recipients of the spell may be more than 30’ apart

Repelling Light : Low duration and low damage. For every 2 additional spell point you spend, the damage to creature crossing the barrier increase by +1d6

Slay Living : For every 2 spell point you spend, this spell deal an extra +1d6 damage on a succesful save

Spectral Hand : Can this spell let you use the hand at range as if it was your true hand ? Can you open a book ? cook ? write ?

Spell Turning : Unlimited Spell Turning seem very powerful considering also a medium duration. I would limit it to 1 Spell level / Caster level with the following augmentation : For every 1 additional spell point you spend, you can turn an additional 1 Spell level

Time Stop : So now you can stop time and you can use that extra action to attack ?

Touch of Idiocy : For every 3 additional spell points you spend, the intelligence, wisdom and charisma penalty inflicted by the touch increases by 1

That's all for now

[Ernir]

Hi, everyone. Sorry about not replying earlier - I was in a rush when I first saw the posts, and didn't reply right away. Then it kind of got pushed off the priority queue. Lame, I know.

But, I do have the good news of a new version (https://github.com/Ernir/VancianToPsionics/releases/tag/v0.12), the first one for quite a while! A lot of the latest comments have made it in.

As for the webpage, it has been going well enough (meaning, I haven't yet found out that parsing the document is impossible), although I've been doing content again rather than focusing on that one lately.


This is amazing and I love it! There is just one thing that bothers me.

I notice that few of your item creation and usage rules explicitly mention using spell points. I notice the rules on using spell points to recharge wands and other spell storing magic items, and I would assume that casting a spell from a scroll incurs the normal spell point cost of the spell each time you cast it from the description. However, am I correct that any other magic item usages do not require the user to spend spell points and that the days spent crafting these items are assumed not to be adventuring days during which the caster's spell point reserve could be used (they are instead all invested in the item being crafted)?

I ask because I think requiring spell point expenditures could be a way to make metamagic rods function properly without being free. Think of it like a resistor in the magical "circuit" of casting the spell; you have to add more power to overcome it, but in doing so you change the spell's effects. Thus in the same way buying a scroll is like buying an "Expanded Knowledge" feat, buying such a metamagic rod would be like buying a metamagic feat (especially if they are similarly fragile).

You could even go a step further and add metamagic matrices that give a one-time use of the feat when you spend the additional required spell points on the spell you use it with, before being destroyed.

Both types of metamagic items would automatically be incompatible with other spell storing magic items, due to your "one source of spell points" rule, but would need an additional rule to make sure they do not allow you to bypass the caster level restriction on how many spell points can be spent on a given spell.

I made a rule to recharge wands? I can't find it now. :smalltongue:

Yes, using a scroll depletes the caster's own SP reserve. Others don't. And yeah, crafting in 3.5 usually assumes downtime.

And congratulations, I don't think I've heard a better idea/rationale for metamagic rods yet. They might make it in after all!

I didn't add it in in this release (this requires more mulling over), but the idea has merit.


I have comment a Long Long time ago, but here's another shot of commentary :
Oh, yeah, you were the first to comment on this in depth, actually. Late 2010 or early 2011, I believe.

Forever appreciated.


I know that you have made lot of spell restricted to Domains or Wizard School Specialisation and I like that, I think however that some of thoses spells should be able to be use by Priest/Wizard as a spell of +2 spell level that way you still have an advantage if you have the right specialisation/domain.
Right now, that's kind of the Sorcerer's "thing". Not sure how much I should mix it up.

I do think there's something that should be done to make, say, specialist evoker spells more accessible to necromancers than Paladin spells are (which is all Expanded Knowledge does). Not quite sure how exactly, though, this might be one of the better suggestions. :smallsmile:


(Lots of spell modification suggestions)
Woha! I like.

What I did with the suggestions is compiled below (spoilered for length):

Where I did stuff:
Adapt Body: Sure, why not? Changed to touch, and party friendly augment added.
Align Water: Cool, done!
Burn: Hmm, maybe it's too powerful. Shortened the duration and made it explicit that the fires can be put out.
Dweomer Blockade/Rip: Now available for Abjurers!
Floating Disk: I made one more augment. It's not like a few extra tons of carrying capacity will break it.
Gust of Wind: Added an augment for wind speed, which by my modified augmentation rule, also increases the DC.
Hall of Mirrors: Added a mass augment, not quite so cheap as you suggested, though.
Halt Undead: Yeah, that's kind of a stupid augment, isn't it? Removed. :smallconfused:
Hand of Force: I increased the base duration.
Ice Storm: I've always seen it more as a BFC spell than a blast, but I added an inefficient damage augment.
Implosion: I took the "You can target a particular creature only once with each casting of the spell" clause out because I don't think it's necessary for a spell of that level. Still, I took a second look, and ended up shortening the duration back down to the original, and added a duration augment instead.
Interposing Hand: Weight augment added!
Invisibility Purge: Duration fixed.
Magic Missile: Excellent idea. I've been struggling with that one.
Meteor: Could probably use a fire component. Damage reduction still doesn't apply, because it's a spell, though.
Power Word: Changed the table to use word descriptions, more clear at the cost of very little real estate in the table.
Remove Blindness/Deafness / Remove Curse / Remove Disease: Mass augments added!
Repelling Light: Damage augment added.
Slay Living: A damage-on-successful-save augment is more interesting than the null augment. Sure!
Touch of Idiocy: More damage, coming up.

Where I didn't:
Aligned Protection/Sword: I could restrict it to allies, but I don't really see a reason.
Animal Shapes: Yeah, I know it's weird. TBH, this could have been done with Augments (and perhaps more elegantly), but I wanted spells named Animal Shapes and Shapechange...
Animate Dead: What's a greater skeleton/zombie?
Antimagic Field: I kind of want a dedicated spell for that effect. See: Dweomer Blockade...
Arrow of Death: I don't think 24 hour duration is needed, more interesting as a swift action spell IMO.
Assault of the Sevenfold Heaven: Well, I made it to be a nuke for Paladins. Might be a bad thematic fit, but I think I'm keeping it.
Burning Hands: Ah, that's an alias for "Energized Touch" now. I mention it in the text, but yeah, a bit awkward...
Clairvoyance: I think allowing supernatural senses would make it rather too difficult to defend against.
Consecrate/Desecrate: The spells are still super alignment-specific. I think this really is cause to re-evaluate the whole Cleric spell selection... but I'm keeping it this way for now.
Form of the Celestial/Elemental/Fiend: They don't have augments because they don't give a particular form, just fairly generic traits associated with the theme. Although, maybe that is a better way to do it...
Maze: I don't want to remove the plane-shifting limitation from the spell. It's plenty powerful already, I believe.
Spectral Hand: I made it specific to touch spells. Inferring something else from it isn't impossible, but I'm content with leaving that question to GMs.
Spell Turning: It's just like Reddopsi (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/reddopsi.htm), I think it's fine. It's a bit more dangerous thanks to the rebounding effects, even.
Time Stop: Right now, yes, you can attack during a Time Stop. I still haven't gotten a real-live playtest involving this spell to tell me whether that's more or less broken than the original (it grants fewer actions), but the reason I went this way was mostly to make it better defined. I could still make it more similar to good-old Temporal Acceleration (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/temporalAcceleration.htm).

On Awaken Nature's Wrath, Immortal Army: Mostly, I think the effects are kind of too large for most 9th-levels. Genesis kind of should be here too...

Epic would be a good fit, only I still haven't done those. But yes, they are candidates for an upgrade... some day.

[Ernir]

A friend wanted to play a Trapsmith (Dungeonscape) in a RL game. So here's a quick and dirty conversion of the spellcasting. I do not think this requires any rewriting of other class features.

Trapsmith Spellcasting

Key Ability Modifier
Trapsmith spellcasting is Intelligence-based (you know the drill).

Special rule:
A Trapsmith's base caster level is equal to their class level +4.

Trapsmith spell Points per day, spells known and maximum spell Level:


SP/Day
Spells Known
Max level


1
2
3rd


2
3
3rd


4
4
4th


8
5
4th


16
7
5th



Trapsmith spell list

1st level spells:

Detect Magic
Open and Close

2nd level spells:

Resist Energy
Wombat's Boost

3rd level spells:

Clairvoyance
Dispel Magic
Gaseous Form
Haste
Remove Curse

4th level spells:

Arcane Eye
Dimension Door
Globe of Invulnerability
Mold Material
Resilient Sphere
Stoneskin

5th level spells:

Interposing Hand
Wall of Stone



Notes: I do not have a particular vision for the spell list, so it is a naive conversion of the normal list. I did away with the high-level-spells-at-low-levels feature, and instead just gave immediate access to 3rd level spells. This allows the class to get more use out of Expanded Knowledge, which I think is better than beefing up Expanded Knowledge for everyone else. Also, this means the spells won't be cast at wonky caster levels.

[Ernir]

Hey. I just released a very small update, bringing us up to beta 1.12b. You can read the release notes here. (https://github.com/Ernir/VancianToPsionics/releases/tag/v0.12b)

But what I think people might find more interesting than the update itself is that I recently found an excuse to work on translating this to HTML.
Which means, here's a website (http://eirikur.ernir.net/vanciantopsionics/). It's raw and undoubtedly has quite a few parsing errors, but it's there, and I think it's ready enough to receive bug reports and criticism. Please let me know when you find something that's wrong or could be done better!