Silly question, Magic vs Psionics

[Stormlord]

Not really a versus post, but I am starting the planning phases of a new campaign and I am thinking of using a psion or a psychic warrior as one of my reoccurring villains.

My question is, if the psion/PW in question was trying to make it look like he was utilizing magic instead of psionics, how difficult would it be for a PC spell caster to realize it.

Assuming the NPC is actively trying to fool the players, but perhaps not have dedicated any resources to it (no skills or anything).

Of course certain powers would be obvious, but since the plan is for the NPC to be a reoccurring villain they will eventually figure it out, i just want to draw it out as long as possible for a (hopefully) wow factor.

I was thinking something along the lines of Knowledge arcane (DC 20?) but will gladly differ to the experts

thanks in advance

[ericgrau]

I'd think a spellcraft (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/spellcraft.htm) check would make it pretty obvious. Specific magical gestures and words are fairly distinct.

[NNescio]

Not really a versus post, but I am starting the planning phases of a new campaign and I am thinking of using a psion or a psychic warrior as one of my reoccurring villains.

My question is, if the psion/PW in question was trying to make it look like he was utilizing magic instead of psionics, how difficult would it be for a PC spell caster to realize it.

Assuming the NPC is actively trying to fool the players, but perhaps not have dedicated any resources to it (no skills or anything).

Of course certain powers would be obvious, but since the plan is for the NPC to be a reoccurring villain they will eventually figure it out, i just want to draw it out as long as possible for a (hopefully) wow factor.

I was thinking something along the lines of Knowledge arcane (DC 20?) but will gladly differ to the experts

thanks in advance

Make your BBEG a Spell-to-Power Erudite.

[Bakkan]

My first thought is that this will be difficult without some kind of ability specifically allowing psionics to look like magic, because of the Spellcraft skill. If anyone in your party has the Spellcraft skill trained, then they will probably be rolling it every single time anyone appears to be doing anything remotely magical and asking "what spell did he cast?" It's only a DC 15+spell level (max of 24 for 9th level spells) to identify a spell being cast. If a character looks at a person waving his fingers around and muttering some strange words and is well trained in Spellcraft, he should normally be able to tell instantly whether or not the person is legitimately casting a spell.

So I think that unless none of your players are putting points into Spellcraft, you're going to have to houserule something.

[Stormlord]

well via that chart

15 + spell level Identify a spell being cast. (You must see or hear the spell’s verbal or somatic components.) No action required. No retry.

this would reallly mess with the caster, since the spell isnt arcane...or really a spell. It could mean they just dont know WHAT the NPC just cast or perhaps they would realize it just wasnt arcane at all (leaning towards the former)

20 + spell level Identify a spell that’s already in place and in effect. You must be able to see or detect the effects of the spell. No action required. No retry.
20 + spell level Identify materials created or shaped by magic, such as noting that an iron wall is the result of a wall of iron spell. No action required. No retry.

This could be possible for what I am thinking, Identifying that a spell was really a power by thinking about it after the fact...

[Stormlord]

lol few more responses while i was responding the first one.

I always envision psionics being equal, dispel magic will dispel psionic powers and vice versa (spell resistance and power resistance being equal) Otherwise I just dont think its fair.

but your right, it seems that they players SHOULD know what was going on with spellcraft checks, but would the lack of identification be something that should puzzle the players or would it just be the DM being a jerk

[mikau013]

Let your BBEG yell out his spells before he casts them, so maybe they don't roll any spellcraft checks :smallbiggrin:

And IIRC there is a skill trick named something like false theurgy that masks your spellcasting

[Psyren]

I'd make it a Bluff check, opposed by the Spellcraft or Sense Motive check of the observer (whichever is higher.) But AFAIK there's no RAW around faking casting when you aren't really casting anything.

Be sure to suppress your displays, otherwise anyone in range gets an automatic Psicraft check to figure out what you're actually doing.

[Quietus]

Use Concentration to hide your displays. Tell your players that the caster isn't using any somatic or verbal components, and the spells he's casting seem to not have any visual cues, as though cast by someone with the Invisible Spell metamagic feat. You can describe some of what's happening by "You could tell that was a spread effect that did fire damage", by the way it hit them, but they wouldn't know if that's a silent, stilled, invisible fireball, or simply an energy ball power with the display hidden.

[Flickerdart]

Psionics look like SLAs already - no components, no gestures, they just think about it and something somewhere explodes. It would be pretty difficult to pretend they're spells, but passing off as a warlock should be a cinch.

[Maquise]

Depends on the level of psi-magic transparency you are using. I like the PF rules, which fold Spellcraft and Psicraft into the same skills and such.

That being said, make sure to remember the concentration checks to suppress the displays. If you don't or fail, remember to put the displays in.

[Urpriest]

I think there's a skill trick that lets you pretend to be casting a spell when you aren't, though I may be thinking of an old skill usage and/or feat from 3.0.

[Greenish]

I think there's a skill trick that lets you pretend to be casting a spell when you aren't, though I may be thinking of an old skill usage and/or feat from 3.0.I can remember a skill trick to appear to be casting something other than what you're actually casting, and a skill trick/skill use to appear not to be casting at all, but to appear to be casting when you aren't…

[Stormlord]

hrmm, l guess I am being unclear.

its true the NPC wont be casting, but they will be manifesting, from the players point of view its going to be a different method of getting the same result.

perhaps i'll just house rule this, spellcraft checks just wont work (or perhaps they do in cases where a power and a spell are nearly identical).

Its not a huge deal, just something to add a little mystery and perhaps worry to the players until they do finally figure it out. I'm sure they will spend some time guessing (and maybe even figure it out quicker than i hope) but confirming should be something like a small moral victory for them

[FMArthur]

Be careful with how you handwave it. If they do know the rules, figuring it out might be hard if what you're doing would actually rule psionics out as a possibility.

[Stormlord]

lol i guess I am just old school. Did most of my DMing under 2nd edition
although i have played a lot of 3rd/3.5 and know the rules pretty well.

that's one of my complaints about 3.x, this feeling that there is a rule or a roll for almost everything, takes a lot of wonder/mystery out of things :P Its not really even a big deal. Just something for the players to wonder about and perhaps worry about, it wont have any special purpose (unless they prep for a mage or gish and get a psionic mage or psionic gish, which will be funny for me). But its not going to have any major affect on anything....

[Psyren]

that's one of my complaints about 3.x, this feeling that there is a rule or a roll for almost everything, takes a lot of wonder/mystery out of things :P

I keep finding excuses to trot this out. (http://xkcd.com/877/)

[Stormlord]

I keep finding excuses to trot this out. (http://xkcd.com/877/)

lol touche, touche :smalltongue:

[Greenish]

Well, you could have the psion wave his hands and mutter things while manifesting powers. The characters without Spellcraft would then insist he is casting spells, since they see the effects, while characters with Spellcraft would be equally insistent that he can't be casting, because he's just muttering gibberish!

Confusion for all!

[Urpriest]

To be fair, I think it's possible to identify a spell with Spellcraft, but not to identify something as categorically not a spell. So if you're ok with the characters not knowing what the psion is casting that could work.

[Stormlord]

i had another thought about this

styles of magic. Granted, most mages would cast magic in similar ways using similar methods. But would a european mage with spellcraft be able to identify what an australian mage was casting before the effects happened?

could always describe the scene something like

DM "He makes an obscure gesture and mutters something under his breath" Mage PC: Spellcraft check to figure out what he is casting
DM: Ok, roll it
Mage PC: (Rolls Whatever)
DM: You cannot seem to identify what he is saying or doing, it appears as enigmatic as you seem to your fighter buddy. He is either using a system of magic your completely unfamiliar with or you just have no idea what he is casting
Mage PC: :smallfurious::smalleek:

[Bakkan]

i had another thought about this

styles of magic. Granted, most mages would cast magic in similar ways using similar methods. But would a european mage with spellcraft be able to identify what an australian mage was casting before the effects happened?

could always describe the scene something like

DM "He makes an obscure gesture and mutters something under his breath" Mage PC: Spellcraft check to figure out what he is casting
DM: Ok, roll it
Mage PC: (Rolls Whatever)
DM: You cannot seem to identify what he is saying or doing, it appears as enigmatic as you seem to your fighter buddy. He is either using a system of magic your completely unfamiliar with or you just have no idea what he is casting
Mage PC: :smallfurious::smalleek:

I would feel a little cheated as a PC if this happened. Of course, I take the "Magic is like Science" paradigm. If a european chemist was watching an australian chemist work, he would likely know what was going on, because both scientists deal in the same stuff. The more specialized the chemistry the australian chemist was doing, the harder it would be for the european chemist to figure it out, but that's reflected in the scaling Spellcraft DC.

[Rubik]

I would feel a little cheated as a PC if this happened. Of course, I take the "Magic is like Science" paradigm. If a european chemist was watching an australian chemist work, he would likely know what was going on, because both scientists deal in the same stuff. The more specialized the chemistry the australian chemist was doing, the harder it would be for the european chemist to figure it out, but that's reflected in the scaling Spellcraft DC.And yet, RAW, that's pretty much what he's supposed to do, since psionics is based on Psicraft, and Spellcraft cannot identify it.

So it's like the European chemist watching the Australian chemist using labels in braille and trying to read them, when the European chemist isn't fluent. He might know what's going on on a macro scale (effects of the chemical reactions vs the overall effects of a power), but not on a micro scale (what exact measurements are being used vs how the "caster" is getting his effect).

[sonofzeal]

There's a skill trick "Conceal Casting". Just have the Psion doing his things, and mention to the PC Mage that it's possible to cast without making it obvious. The Mage would need a high Spot to detect it, but if he's an arcanist chances are heavily against him having a Spot check that's worth a darn.

[FMArthur]

Hey! Stop spreading that useless skill trick around! :smallyuk:

There's a generic Sleight of Hand usage that completely obviates Complete Scoundrel's Conceal Spellcasting skill trick. Anyone with Sleight of Hand can do it as much as they want at no cost. Races of Stone has the expanded skill usage text explaining it (which was out quite a long time before Complete Scoundrel...).

[sonofzeal]

Hey! Stop spreading that useless skill trick around! :smallyuk:

There's a generic Sleight of Hand usage that completely obviates Complete Scoundrel's Conceal Spellcasting skill trick. Anyone with Sleight of Hand can do it as much as they want at no cost. Races of Stone has the expanded skill usage text explaining it (which was out quite a long time before Complete Scoundrel...).
I thought the RoS one only disguised the somatic components. By my reading, Conceal Spellcasting works on verbal components as well.

[FMArthur]

No, it does both. As far as I can tell they're the same ability but one's free and unlimited.

[Reluctance]

Houserule a feat/skill trick/whatever you want that allows you to look like you're casting any spell when in fact you aren't. In theory someone with good Spellcraft/Know(arcana)/Bluff should have a shot at this; the actualizing of a prepared spell is simple, it's having the energy on hand in the first place that limits what a caster can do.

Just keep in mind that unless he gets a moment to get away with something because the PCs didn't take specific anti-psi defenses, the big reveal moment will fall flat. If he escapes despite being bound and having his component pouch taken away, that's actually a twist. (One that you'll never be able to pull off again after that, but still.) If the surprise is that the magic user is using a slightly different magic system, I don't know that the PCs reaction will be all that different.

[Bakkan]

And yet, RAW, that's pretty much what he's supposed to do, since psionics is based on Psicraft, and Spellcraft cannot identify it.

So it's like the European chemist watching the Australian chemist using labels in braille and trying to read them, when the European chemist isn't fluent. He might know what's going on on a macro scale (effects of the chemical reactions vs the overall effects of a power), but not on a micro scale (what exact measurements are being used vs how the "caster" is getting his effect).

Ah, I think I may have not expressed myself completely. I meant that I would feel cheated if I couldn't tell that he wasn't using arcane magic. I have not problem with not knowing what it is he's doing, but I should be able to rule out one possibility (if my Spellcraft is reliable).