[3.5] You know what? Psi is overpowered/annoying.

[Snowbluff]

Psi is a stronger system mechanically than magic. Magic is already overpowered.

1) No components. I mean, at least you can cut out a wizard's tongue to keep him from teleporting. The components are supposed to act as a form of weakness. It doesn't work all the time, but keep this in mind.

2) Every power can be ninth level. This isn't so bad, but keep in mind that a Wizard can not use Heighten to Summon Monster I to Summon Monster IX. I think Sorcerers get to know more than Psions, so it's not bad, just offensive.

Augmentation is a cool rule, it just is messed up sometimes. We have a double standard when it comes to it. Using augmentation to your advantage? Fine, it's a strength of the system. Subverting MM costs, a strength of magic? Cheese.

3) Psi/Magic Transparency. This should never have been a rule because it should have like this already. There is no reason Powers should not functions as spells for everything.

It just seems like they weren't thinking when they made some of the differences between psionics and magic. It's a good thing that their distinct spells lists keeps them different enough to make it apples and oranges, right? (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20070629a)

XPH is overpowered for the same reasons PHB is. You'll be hard pressed to find a similar density of strong material. I mean, PHB has 3 T1 and 1 T2 class. XPH pretty much supplies the backing behind a T1 and T2. What the heck?

Oh, and 4) Most players don't know anything about psionics. Seriously, play it before hating it.

[Callin]

Psionics are pretty much outright banned with my group which sucks because me and 2 others really like to play Psions when the mood strikes us.

[Karnith]

What the heck?
After the travesty that was 3.0 psionics, maybe Wizards felt that they needed to go to the other end of the power spectrum?

[Callin]

See I found 3.0 Psionics to be way more OP than XPH due to being poorly written and many loopholes. Cherry Picking was the way to go with 3.0

[JoshuaZ]

Psi is a stronger system mechanically than magic. Magic is already overpowered.

So both magic and psionics have a lot of broken issues. But magic has generally a lot more options, and a lot more splat books with broken things in them. The truth is that both systems have their pluses and minuses.



1) No components. I mean, at least you can cut out a wizard's tongue to keep him from teleporting. The components are supposed to act as a form of weakness. It doesn't work all the time, but keep this in mind.

Still spell and silent spell exist. A wizard who wants to be not capturable can get to be as good as a psion in that regard without too much build effort.



2) Every power can be ninth level. This isn't so bad, but keep in mind that a Wizard can not use Heighten to Summon Monster I to Summon Monster IX. I think Sorcerers get to know more than Psions, so it's not bad, just offensive.

This isn't how augmentation works. Only some powers have augmentation, so how is this "offensive"? Moreover, the cost is a major issue here- if one routinely augments powers one runs out of power points. Note for example that spells do damage that generally scales with the caster level- powers don't get this for free, they have to augment. And in fact powers when augmented are still treated as a power of their actual level. Thus for example it doesn't matter how much I augment a level 1 power, it will still be blocked by a less globe of invulnerability.



Augmentation is a cool rule, it just is messed up sometimes. We have a double standard when it comes to it. Using augmentation to your advantage? Fine, it's a strength of the system. Subverting MM costs, a strength of magic? Cheese.

So actually, there aren't many options to reduce augment costs, and yes, substantially reducing augment costs can be cheesy. This isn't incidentally a criticism of the *system* but a complaint about attitudes. So even if this were an issue it wouldn't actually advance your thesis.



3) Psi/Magic Transparency. This should never have been a rule because it should have like this already. There is no reason Powers should not functions as spells for everything.

So, almost no one plays with magic and psionics not being transparent. And if it an issue, just don't play with that *optional rule*.



XPH is overpowered for the same reasons PHB is. You'll be hard pressed to find a similar density of strong material. I mean, PHB has 3 T1 and 1 T2 class. XPH pretty much supplies the backing behind a T1 and T2. What the heck?

[quote]

I don't see how this is relevant. The density of T1s or T2s doesn't make the system stronger. If I had a 100 different arcane casting classes all T4 or T5 or T6, in addition to the standard classes, it wouldn't make arcane spellcasting less powerful.

[quote]
Oh, and 4) Most players don't know anything about psionics.

Huh? How does this help your argument at all? And since most players don't play psionics how does it matter?

Is it possible this entire post was meant to be in blue?

[Slipperychicken]

Psi is a stronger system mechanically than magic. Magic is already overpowered.

1) No components. I mean, at least you can cut out a wizard's tongue to keep him from teleporting. The components are supposed to act as a form of weakness. It doesn't work all the time, but keep this in mind.


At the point where you're cutting people's tongues out, it's irrelevant you won long the fight a long time ago, and could just as easily have killed him (you can't cast spells when you're dead). You could have just cut out the Psion's brain so he couldn't manifest.

The StP Erudite is stanky cheese, and should always be banned. XPH is notoriously badly written, and often ignored.

Psionics/Magic transparency seems more like a fix. It improved things in my opinion.

A psionic character ultimately gets fewer powers/day than fullcasters, and if they augment everything to max, that's a nova, and it'll quickly burn them out (much like dumping your highest spell level at everything you see, It can't last). I think augmentation is something magic should have gotten too, even though it clashes with the Vancian magic system. No one should have to learn the same spell nine times, especially if the only difference is a bigger number.

As far as knowing the system, all you really need to know is that you can't augment more than your manifester level. People often skip that part and say "Psionics is SOOOO BROOOOOWKEN. I can get 24d6 at level 1!", and then I have to try to beat that information into their heads.

[JoshuaZ]

The StP Erudite is stanky cheese, and should always be banned. XPH is notoriously badly written, and often ignored.

Er, I think you mean Complete Psion, not XPH.

[Zero grim]

I'm not to knowledgeable when it comes to psionic's so ill only speak of what little I've seen,

Its simple to use, which is nice for new players but does allow greater freedom then even spontaneous arcane/divine casters, you don't even have to think "should I save my last 4th slot for something" you just have to keep track of points.

though usually when combat rolls round our psion twiddles his thumbs, I've used a lot of mindless things recently and every good power he seems to have has the mind affecting descriptor, so he seems to be shut down that way.

On the side of the whole OP thing, id say Psi isn't more OP then magic, its just different, magic will always stand out as the trump since nearly ever book in existence adds to a wizards spell list or adds uses to spells (such as new things added to summon or new magic items for crafting)

While psions are harder to shut down (with lack of any really focus to speak off) they do lack greatly in the support aspect too, the psion is hard shut down but the party will probably fight harder to protect the healer if things go bad.

From the DM point I used to have a grudge against psionics (due to a bad players from a long time ago who only played psions, he made up more rules then he knew), now I like psions, I run them as just another sort of magic for simplicity's sake, I would play one now that I know what they really are like but it wouldn't be my first pick. (since I have yet to find Psi necromancy)

[Tvtyrant]

I am almost entirely sure this is a joke thread. If not; Psionics are OP compared to mundanes. They are on the weaker side compared to full vancian casting.

[Snowbluff]

Huh? How does this help your argument at all? And since most players don't play psionics how does it matter?
Psionics is annoying. If a player attempting to successfully manifest a 72 point power at level 12 is annoying, I think it falls under this being a problem. :smalltongue: It also works as a jab for people not reading my argument really carefully.

Is it possible this entire post was meant to be in blue?
Naw, you're just misunderstanding me.



So, almost no one plays with magic and psionics not being transparent. And if it an issue, just don't play with that *optional rule*.
Like here, for example. My problem is that it is an optional rule, NOT the default.

I think it's this, the lack of components, and StP Erudite (Psionics is not weaker than magic, because all of Magic is included under Psi.) that shove it over a cliff.

[TuggyNE]

I am almost entirely sure this is a joke thread. If not; Psionics are OP compared to mundanes. They are on the weaker side compared to full vancian casting.

Can't speak to whether or not this is a joke thread, but pretty sure it should be.

:smallwink:

[StreamOfTheSky]

I don't like psonics. I don't think it's more broken than magic, but I dislike that the entire system is predicated upon trying to maximize your ML so you can nova as hard as possible with augmenting and then run out of PP and rest. Casters can nova as well, of course, but the entire system of psionics is basically built around it, and I don't like that. And if you try to make a character that uses PP sparingly and plans for a long day of encounters, you are left with horrible powers that don't autoscale with level like spells do, no reserve feat type system, nothing. I especially hate that direct damage powers require augmenting just to keep up on d6's. Blasting is the most pp-intensive thing you can do in psionics, despite being the weakest category of magic, and that is completely ass-backwards.

[WhatBigTeeth]

Like here, for example. My problem is that it is an optional rule, NOT the default.
Strike that. Reverse it.

[Snowbluff]

Strike that. Reverse it.
What, was my saying there shouldn't be a difference clear enough?

Can't speak to whether or not this is a joke thread, but pretty sure it should be.

:smallwink:I see you have noticed my humor. Some of my complaints are far less serious than others. :smalltongue::smallwink:


I especially hate that direct damage powers require augmenting just to keep up on d6's. Blasting is the most pp-intensive thing you can do in psionics, despite being the weakest category of magic, and that is completely ass-backwards.
Yeah, psionic blasting annoys me as well. Why would the typically least effective way of casting be so intensive?

[Gnome Alone]

I'll edge it closer to joke-thread with my highly intellectual take on psionics: Crystals ectoplasm barf barf barf I'm psionics.

Just seems a bit incongrous for D&D. Like if Evie from Out Of This World started casting Fireballs. Mages AND psychics? Huh?

[Snowbluff]

Well, we got some some spells that kind of work like psychic powers, I guess. Telekinesis is a psychic thing, right? I honestly don't know. It might just be named literally.


I'll edge it closer to joke-thread with my highly intellectual take on psionics: Crystals ectoplasm barf barf barf I'm psionics.

I... okay, I will not even touch that ectoplasm goo. :smallyuk:

[JusticeZero]

If a player attempting to successfully manifest a 72 point power at level 12 is annoying, I think it falls under this being a problem. :smalltongue:
That's equivalent to the level 8 rogue asking if they cant just walk on the cloud someone summoned. There are rules for that; it requires a DC 100 Balance check, which said rogue does not have. Likewise, a level 12 character trying to dump 72 points into a power isn't very annoying, because all you have to do is say "According to the rules, you can only spend 12 points on the power." and go on to the next person.

They fit great with some campaigns, no worse than a lot of other splat classes and PrC's. And "They're not very efficient with blasting" to me sounds like the answer is "So don't build around blasting then."

[ben-zayb]

Oh, and 4) Most players don't know anything about psionics. Seriously, play it before hating it.
[F0NT="flaming letters"][SlZE="200foot"]Oh, and 4) Most players don't know anything about psionics. Seriously, play it before hating it.[/SIZE][/FONT]

I usually ain't Captain Obvious. But when I do, it's for the benefit of those who have unlucky Spot rolls. :smallbiggrin:

But yeah. The "Psionics is ZOMFGBBQ-Overpowered" Myth (with respect to its magic equivalent) had been busted around a decade ago.

[Waspinator]

I'm looking at page 65 of the Expanded Psionics Handbook. Resistance and dispelling transparency is considered the norm, "Psionics is different" IS the variant.

[Juntao112]

Snowbluff
Troll in the Playground
Says it all, methinks :smallwink:

I was amused by this thread.

[DMVerdandi]

So, I understand (I guess), why a lot of people are put off by the fluff of psionics. It is highly technical and scientific for what is a setting analogous to the 13-1500's, ie greyhawk proper.

But my question is this, what do you think of the spell point system from the SRD? I think vancian casting is just clunky and restricting, and I think the whole idea of being a magic grenade launcher is out of place in itself.
The point system just seems so much more flexible, no?

Spell point wizard has one of the coolest casting mechanics out there.
(Memorize spells in the morning, Each slot carries a spell that can be cast as long as you have the spell points for it.)

Yay or Nay on spell points?

[TuggyNE]

So, I understand (I guess), why a lot of people are put off by the fluff of psionics. It is highly technical and scientific for what is a setting analogous to the 13-1500's, ie greyhawk proper.

But my question is this, what do you think of the spell point system from the SRD? I think vancian casting is just clunky and restricting, and I think the whole idea of being a magic grenade launcher is out of place in itself.
The point system just seems so much more flexible, no?

Spell point wizard has one of the coolest casting mechanics out there.
(Memorize spells in the morning, Each slot carries a spell that can be cast as long as you have the spell points for it.)

Yay or Nay on spell points?

The idea is good, but the mechanics of the UA variant are a bit lacking.

However, Ernir's replacement has no such trouble; it uses psionic mechanics wholesale, but thoroughly and effectively refluffs everything, as well as converting a lot of existing spells over to powers and polishing up a few of them as well.

[StreamOfTheSky]

So, I understand (I guess), why a lot of people are put off by the fluff of psionics. It is highly technical and scientific for what is a setting analogous to the 13-1500's, ie greyhawk proper.

But my question is this, what do you think of the spell point system from the SRD? I think vancian casting is just clunky and restricting, and I think the whole idea of being a magic grenade launcher is out of place in itself.
The point system just seems so much more flexible, no?

Spell point wizard has one of the coolest casting mechanics out there.
(Memorize spells in the morning, Each slot carries a spell that can be cast as long as you have the spell points for it.)

Yay or Nay on spell points?

Spell Points is one of the most horribly broken, idiotic things I have ever read.

I've been sorely tempted to write a "The internet needs a spell points rant" thread out of my frustration in failing to find any existing threads on how broken and stupid spell points rules are.

[Morcleon]

... >.>

... <.<

... >.<

You aimed this thread at me, didn't you Snow? :smallannoyed::smalltongue:


Spell Points is one of the most horribly broken, idiotic things I have ever read.

I've been sorely tempted to write a "The internet needs a spell points rant" thread out of my frustration in failing to find any existing threads on how broken and stupid spell points rules are.

Why? IIRC, spell points are just treating standard Vancian casting with power points rather than spell slots?

[A_S]

Yay or Nay on spell points?

The part of the spell point rules that forces you to augment for blasting needs to be killed with fire. Spells should still scale with level automatically. Then everybody needs to get about half again as many spell points as they do. Then it's an ok system.

[Snowbluff]

Why? IIRC, spell points are just treating standard Vancian casting with power points rather than spell slots?

Well, for starters I could potentially dump all of my points into my higher level spells. 1st levels spells are kind of pointless when I can get a Gate instead. The Vancian Casters were made Vancian to keep this from happening, methinks.

Also, comparing DkS to DS, I think Vancian works better in that game too.

[Morcleon]

Well, for starters I could potentially dump all of my points into my higher level spells. 1st levels spells are kind of pointless when I can get a Gate instead. The Vancian Casters were made Vancian to keep this from happening, methinks.

Also, comparing DkS to DS, I think Vancian works better in that game too.

Just uncap everything. Then it's just like psionics. And we all know how much I would like that. :smallamused:

Never played either, wouldn't know... >.>

[JoshuaZ]

Psionics is annoying. If a player attempting to successfully manifest a 72 point power at level 12 is annoying, I think it falls under this being a problem. :smalltongue: It also works as a jab for people not reading my argument really carefully.

Naw, you're just misunderstanding me.



Possibly, since the title is "psi" is overpowered, and you seem to be arguing rather that "psionics is annoying" which is not the same thing.



Like here, for example. My problem is that it is an optional rule, NOT the default.

Incorrect. Which incidentally is slightly ironic if you are going to complain about players not knowing enough about psionics.




I think it's this, the lack of components, and StP Erudite (Psionics is not weaker than magic, because all of Magic is included under Psi.) that shove it over a cliff.

So, first of all StP erudite is the high end of T1, about on par with a wizard, but their maximum number of powers per a day does provide a noticeable limitation. Second of all, pretty much everyone agrees that erudite is in general overpowered. The existence of an overpowered base class using a system is not a good argument that the system is overpowered by itself.


Well, for starters I could potentially dump all of my points into my higher level spells. 1st levels spells are kind of pointless when I can get a Gate instead. The Vancian Casters were made Vancian to keep this from happening, methinks.

Vancian is about prior preparation not about specific system of spells per a day being fixed spread to level. There are Vancian spell point systems, where you specify at the beginning of the day how many points you allocate to each spell. And spellcasting was Vancian because Gygax like Vance's work, no other reason.

[WhatBigTeeth]

So, first of all StP erudite is the high end of T1, about on par with a wizard, but their maximum number of powers per a day does provide a noticeable limitation.Arcane Fusion is the typical method of circumventing that limit.


The existence of an overpowered base class using a system is not a good argument that the system is overpowered by itself.

And the most flagrant offenders isn't even as noticeable as an overpowered base class; it's a single obscure web article in which every single entry is a pretty flagrantly poorly-conceived (it's the same article that lets the ardent ignore the limitations of both its class and the general psionics rules, that gives the lurk augments that don't make sense under augment rules and which even manages to give the divine mind a borderline OP ability).

[Starbuck_II]

So, first of all StP erudite is the high end of T1, about on par with a wizard, but their maximum number of powers per a day does provide a noticeable limitation. Second of all, pretty much everyone agrees that erudite is in general overpowered. The existence of an overpowered base class using a system is not a good argument that the system is overpowered by itself.


Actually there are three RAW ways to read "maximum number of powers per a day "
1) Per level
2) Per Power level
3) Per Ever

3 is way too limiting so most people argue between 1 and 2.
You read it as 1 I'm assuming.

[Psyren]

Psionics does present unique challenges. Restraining a manifester (or even detecting what they're doing) is indeed much harder, especially in a low-magic setting, than doing the same to a spellcaster. Psionic Restraints (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/items/universalItems.htm#psionicRestraints) can help with that, but even with the Greater version a psion can do something like blink 10 feet to get through bars or shrink to wriggle between them.

As far as the "nova" problem, this is simply something the DM has to be aware of, and plan for. To properly challenge a psionicist, you need enough encounters per day that they're not able to simply blow their complement and then rest. But in the end, it's not much different than if every spellcaster in a normal campaign were to pick up Versatile Spellcaster. This has a similar effect to a points system - giving them granular control over their resources and in particular being able to sacrifice lower slots to fuel higher ones, just like psions can. But if you only have one or two encounters per day and psions are able to simply burn their way through them and sleep, it's easy to conclude that psionics is more powerful than it really is.


As far as Spell Points, Stream is right - they're terrible purely as written. Imagine psionics, except the only powers that ever need to be augmented are direct-damage powers - everything else autoscales just like vancian. Now give every class 50% more power points than normal, and remove the balancing factor of psionic focus - you can stack metamagic to your heart's content, and simultaneously benefit from feats like spell focus. Spell Points can be made to work, but doing so requires learning the lessons psionics can teach rather than disregarding them.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Why? IIRC, spell points are just treating standard Vancian casting with power points rather than spell slots?

No, not at all! Spell points is far more screwed up than power points ever was!
It gives FREE augmenting to all spells. That's crazy! Except for direct damage, which you have to pay to augment. That's even more crazy!

It gives prepared casters more points/day than it does sorcerors!
Confused? Here's a hint: look at the difference in pp each level, it's basically the pp value of the a single spell of highest level available at that point, more or less, capping off at a 17 point difference at 20th level (ie, 1 9th level spell slot). Now go look at the bonus pp for ability score and highest spell level you can cast. Notice how going up a spell level is a greater change than the base difference? Guess who spends half the game with a higher spell level than sorcerors do? Prepared casters! Yay! So they end up with MORE points on average than the sorc does!

But wait! I'm not done! Let's go back to that sorc vs. wiz base points table. The difference is tiny. One 9th level spell is the sole difference at level 20. ONE!! In a system where specialist slots are treated as bonus spells known, so the sorc should have +2 spells PER GOD-Fing-D*&% spell level! What the hell is this bs?!

But wait, there's still more! Check out how prepared casters work in the spell points system and how spont. casters do:
With this variant, spellcasters still prepare spells as normal (assuming they normally prepare spells). In effect, casters who prepare spells are setting their list of “spells known” for the day.

Characters who cast all their spells spontaneously—such as bards and sorcerers—don’t have to prepare spells. They can cast any spell they know by spending the requisite number of spell points.

So... A sorceror... casts spells like a sorceror. With a gimped amount of spells/day, but still, like a sorceror.

And a wizard... casts spells like a sorceror who can change his entire spells known list every freaking day HOW THE HELL IS NO ONE ELSE FROTHING AT THE MOUTH ENRAGED BY THIS F---ING ACURSED OTYUGH POO?!!!!!!!

*Ahem* And that is why spell points is the most horrible thing to ever be written in a 3E book.
Please don't get me started on how the suggestions for implementing metamagic feats basically amount to, "here, use lower level slots to cast your beefed up metamagic'd spells that would normally take up your highest level slots... and to balance it we're gonna limit you to doing it only as much as you had highest level slots to burn up normally anyway. Mmm'kay?"

[WhatBigTeeth]

3 is way too limiting so most people argue between 1 and 2.
It's the same as the Wilder. I wouldn't doubt for a second it's how the ability was intended.

[Snowbluff]

Does the nova thing come up a lot when you guys play psi? It sounds like a wizard burning up his slots quickly. Then again, the wizard doing the same thing could present problems in the same way.


Possibly, since the title is "psi" is overpowered, and you seem to be arguing rather that "psionics is annoying" which is not the same thing. They can't be both?


Incorrect. Which incidentally is slightly ironic if you are going to complain about players not knowing enough about psionics.
Well, I flipped around their for a second to be honest. The fact that this can be screwed up or why it's even mention if they are supposed to function the same way mystifies me.Why are the spells called powers again if they function the same way for all effects? (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CallARabbitASmeerp)


So, first of all StP erudite is the high end of T1, about on par with a wizard, but their maximum number of powers per a day does provide a noticeable limitation. Second of all, pretty much everyone agrees that erudite is in general overpowered. The existence of an overpowered base class using a system is not a good argument that the system is overpowered by itself.
Well, if a system has it's primary constituents in the operating in the T1-2 range, giving more gamebreaking opportunity, it is what I would call overpowered.

Powers and Spells are given a certain level of fiat over lesser mechanics, and this can cause issues. This is not news.

Vancian is about prior preparation not about specific system of spells per a day being fixed spread to level.
Finite capacity is also a trait of Vancian Casting, which is what I was referring to. You are only supposed to be able to something (like a ninth level spell) so many times per day.

[Psyren]

Does the nova thing come up a lot when you guys play psi? It sounds like a wizard burning up his slots quickly. Then again, the wizard doing the same thing could present problems in the same way.

In my games we typically have multiple sessions (2-3) before we're allowed to rest and recover resources, so people tend to be frugal as a result. You never know what the DM might have planned after all. We also maintain online copies of our sheets in a Google Spreadsheet that the DM has access to so he knows how many spells/PP the casters have remaining.

Nova-ing doesn't come up too often as a result, nor does the 5 minute adventuring day.

[Gnome Alone]

And a wizard... casts spells like a sorceror who can change his entire spells known list every freaking day HOW THE HELL IS NO ONE ELSE FROTHING AT
So... not a fan on the Spirit Shaman either, I'd guess?

[Norin]

Would someone please tell me real quick what vancian casting means? :smallsmile:

[Spuddles]

Psionics is annoying. If a player attempting to successfully manifest a 72 point power at level 12 is annoying, I think it falls under this being a problem. :smalltongue: It also works as a jab for people not reading my argument really carefully.

Naw, you're just misunderstanding me.

Like here, for example. My problem is that it is an optional rule, NOT the default.

I think it's this, the lack of components, and StP Erudite (Psionics is not weaker than magic, because all of Magic is included under Psi.) that shove it over a cliff.

1. What's annoying is new players casting level 9 spells at level 9.
2. Transparency, save for a very few feats & spells, is the default rule.
3. The most annoying thing about psionics are people who think they know it and criticize the system without actually being very well.
4. Being annoying does not necessarily mean something is broken.


I'll edge it closer to joke-thread with my highly intellectual take on psionics: Crystals ectoplasm barf barf barf I'm psionics.

Just seems a bit incongrous for D&D. Like if Evie from Out Of This World started casting Fireballs. Mages AND psychics? Huh?

Aboleths, Mind Flayers, Duergar, and Coutls are all psionic. There are quite a few "classic" D&D monsters that are psionic. I actually like the fact that there's a whole subsystem you can use if you want to really make monsters from before time and after time and out of time feel weird.

[Psyren]

1. What's annoying is new players casting level 9 spells at level 9.

I can't see how anyone would think that's remotely possible. The barest amount of common sense should step in and say no there.

[Spuddles]

I can't see how anyone would think that's remotely possible. The barest amount of common sense should step in and say no there.

You've never had a player want to use x level of spells at level x? I mean, it makes sense. Every newbie spellcaster I've played with has made that mistake.

[TuggyNE]

Would someone please tell me real quick what vancian casting means? :smallsmile:

It comes from Jack Vance's novels; the idea there was that spellcasters would prepare semi-sentient spell programs in their head (which took quite a while) and then release them with predefined triggers at the appropriate moment.

In D&D, it refers to the spell slot system, whether prepared or spontaneous. (And yes, it's a bit of a misnomer these days, but these things happen.)

[Psyren]

You've never had a player want to use x level of spells at level x? I mean, it makes sense. Every newbie spellcaster I've played with has made that mistake.

Well, I suppose it's possible... but just about everyone I've played with learned the ropes from Baldur's Gate/NWN, where those basics were enforced by the system.

But even if that's a problem, it's not one unique to psionics at least.

[Spuddles]

Well, I suppose it's possible... but just about everyone I've played with learned the ropes from Baldur's Gate/NWN, where those basics were enforced by the system.

But even if that's a problem, it's not one unique to psionics at least.

Ah. Almost all the people I've brought into the fold had nearly zero experience with RPGs/video games.

[Wings of Peace]

Spellcasters have a vastly easier time abusing metamagic than their manifesting brethren. It's not the most major concern to everyone but I view it as a very important factor in the higher levels of a campaign.

[shadow_archmagi]

Well, I suppose it's possible... but just about everyone I've played with learned the ropes from Baldur's Gate/NWN, where those basics were enforced by the system.

But even if that's a problem, it's not one unique to psionics at least.

That was the point. Newbie players who don't learn the rules are always something that requires extra work for the rest of the group.


But yeah, Psionics are weaker than traditional magic, for the following reasons-

1. Augmentation adds versatility, but it lowers the baseline. While it's true that you can Heighten anything, anytime, you also have to heighten in order to get what Wizards just refer to as caster level. How big a nerf would it be to wizards if Fireball had to be Heightened in order to deal more than 3d6 damage?

2. There are fewer powers than spells, and what powers do exist are often weaker. Catfall is a much worse version of Featherfall. There's no glitterdust analogue. Far Hand is just Mage Hand, but more expensive *and* weaker.

[JoshuaZ]

They can't be both?


It could be, but then you should try to explain explicitly which areguments to which.



Well, I flipped around their for a second to be honest. The fact that this can be screwed up or why it's even mention if they are supposed to function the same way mystifies me.

Yes, it is an unfortunate sidebar. Almost no one uses it. It doesn't impact the system substantially.





Why are the spells called powers again if they function the same way for all effects? (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CallARabbitASmeerp)

So first of all, this is purely a complaint about notation and terminology. You are welcome in your campaign to also refer to them as spells. But more to the point, they don't work completely as spells do. For example, some feats only apply to powers and not to spells while others work the other way.




Well, if a system has it's primary constituents in the operating in the T1-2 range, giving more gamebreaking opportunity, it is what I would call overpowered.

Almost no one plays an erudite. And it isn't one of the primary aspects of the system, those are the psion and wilder. And if one uses this as an argument one should conclude that arcane and divine magic is also overpowered since major primary (and yes- really primary) constituents are cleric, druid, wizard (all T1), and sorcerer (T2).



Finite capacity is also a trait of Vancian Casting, which is what I was referring to. You are only supposed to be able to something (like a ninth level spell) so many times per day.

This is not a standard use of the term "Vancian" which generally is used to refer to the prepare before hand mechanic. But it also isn't relevant even if one does use your definition: the psion still has a limited numer of daily uses when their power points run out. And in fact, classes which don't have limited daily use like the warlock are often substantially weaker.

[Psyren]

2. There are fewer powers than spells, and what powers do exist are often weaker. Catfall is a much worse version of Featherfall. There's no glitterdust analogue. Far Hand is just Mage Hand, but more expensive *and* weaker.

Psionics is stronger at some things though. Psionic Plane Shift has no focus, so it can get you anywhere, anytime without needing special metals or whatnot. Psionics has MUCH better action economy powers. Psionics effectively gets you Heighten and Energy Substitution for free. Metamorphosis is stronger than Polymorph. Psionics has better healing than arcane magic and better blasting/control than divine magic, at least early on. Psionics is also better at Enchantment, though Illusion is all but nonexistent.

FYI, Psionic Mage Hand does in fact exist - it's in Secrets of Sarlona and referred to as Force of Mind. It's higher level (since cantrips don't exist) but to compensate, it also includes the effects of Open/Close.

[Piggy Knowles]

And a wizard... casts spells like a sorceror who can change his entire spells known list every freaking day HOW THE HELL IS NO ONE ELSE FROTHING AT THE MOUTH ENRAGED BY THIS F---ING ACURSED OTYUGH POO?!!!!!!!

*Ahem* And that is why spell points is the most horrible thing to ever be written in a 3E book.
Please don't get me started on how the suggestions for implementing metamagic feats basically amount to, "here, use lower level slots to cast your beefed up metamagic'd spells that would normally take up your highest level slots... and to balance it we're gonna limit you to doing it only as much as you had highest level slots to burn up normally anyway. Mmm'kay?"

If that makes you mad, stay far away from my current group. They play with a spell point system.... where each spell only costs as much as its spell level (so Charm Person is one point, while Wish is nine points)... and every single caster knows every spell on their list as their "spells known." Every spell. Wizards don't need spellbooks - they just KNOW every single wizard spell in the game. Oh, yeah, and you never run out of spell points, because you get 5 + 1/2 level in Action Points every session, and you can spend an action point to regain three spell points.

And they ban psionics, which they consider broken...

[Snowbluff]

Yes, it is an unfortunate sidebar. Almost no one uses it. It doesn't impact the system substantially. I sure hope not. I have seen more StP play than anything else, though. It being a thing will be labeled annoying.
Just one of the many things that didn't work out or should not have been.



So first of all, this is purely a complaint about notation and terminology. You are welcome in your campaign to also refer to them as spells. But more to the point, they don't work completely as spells do. For example, some feats only apply to powers and not to spells while others work the other way. We are not assuming houserules.

Well, the thing is that a lot of spell feats and mechanics require slot mechanics. You'll need comparable feats for spells that use spell points, or just have the forethought to fix it. Psionics wasn't integrated thoughtfully enough for the latter so the former is what happened. Except it generated undue confusion and gave them an excuse to fill pages with extraneous information.



Almost no one plays an erudite. And it isn't one of the primary aspects of the system, those are the psion and wilder. And if one uses this as an argument one should conclude that arcane and divine magic is also overpowered since major primary (and yes- really primary) constituents are cleric, druid, wizard (all T1), and sorcerer (T2).
This, pretty much. Psionics are overpowered the same way spellcasting is. I prefer lower power level in general, like in the T3 range.



Psionics is stronger at some things though. Psionic Plane Shift has no focus, so it can get you anywhere, anytime without needing special metals or whatnot. Psionics has MUCH better action economy powers. Psionics effectively gets you Heighten and Energy Substitution for free. Metamorphosis is stronger than Polymorph. Psionics has better healing than arcane magic and better blasting/control than divine magic, at least early on. Psionics is also better at Enchantment, though Illusion is all but nonexistent.
I second this notion. If psionics has some weaker spells, it has stronger ones to make up for it. It has definite advantages and disadvantages (mostly in smaller selection and Complete Psionics.)

[StreamOfTheSky]

If that makes you mad, stay far away from my current group. They play with a spell point system.... where each spell only costs as much as its spell level (so Charm Person is one point, while Wish is nine points)... and every single caster knows every spell on their list as their "spells known." Every spell. Wizards don't need spellbooks - they just KNOW every single wizard spell in the game. Oh, yeah, and you never run out of spell points, because you get 5 + 1/2 level in Action Points every session, and you can spend an action point to regain three spell points.

And they ban psionics, which they consider broken...

Sounds like you need to find a new group... At least, I assume and hope your post was griping about their houserules, and not a boast of how awesome they are.

[Karnith]

If that makes you mad, stay far away from my current group. They play with a spell point system.... where each spell only costs as much as its spell level (so Charm Person is one point, while Wish is nine points)... and every single caster knows every spell on their list as their "spells known." Every spell. Wizards don't need spellbooks - they just KNOW every single wizard spell in the game. Oh, yeah, and you never run out of spell points, because you get 5 + 1/2 level in Action Points every session, and you can spend an action point to regain three spell points.
Maybe I'm missing something, but aren't Sorcerers just straight-up worse than Wizards under this system?

[StreamOfTheSky]

Maybe I'm missing something, but aren't Sorcerers just straight-up worse than Wizards under this system?

I assume he meant all casters know their entire spell list, including sorceror. Which would actually make Sorc the best caster if Wizard, and the others still had to prepare from their spells known each day.

Or that effectively every caster knows their entire list and casts it spontaneously and the difference between wiz and sorc is largely nonexistent.

[Karnith]

I assume he meant all casters know their entire spell list, including sorceror. Which would actually make Sorc the best caster if Wizard, and the others still had to prepare from their spells known each day.

Or that effectively every caster knows their entire list and casts it spontaneously and the difference between wiz and sorc is largely nonexistent.
Ah, okay. I took it to mean the latter, but if it's the former then that makes more sense. It's still an insane system, but at least wizards and sorcerers would be distinct.

[Piggy Knowles]

I assume he meant all casters know their entire spell list, including sorceror. Which would actually make Sorc the best caster if Wizard, and the others still had to prepare from their spells known each day.

Or that effectively every caster knows their entire list and casts it spontaneously and the difference between wiz and sorc is largely nonexistent.

Sadly, no, it's the latter. And yes, sorcerers/favored souls get the major short end of the stick here, because now wizards and clerics can also cast spontaneously, and cast a ridiculous number of spells a day, but don't have to wait an extra level to gain new spells. Spoilering the rest so I don't derail the thread too much:

I am playing a wizard, and I know every single wizard spell on demand, from any possible source (including some third party - they tend to be of the opinion that if it shows up in any printed book, it's OK). But the DM nerfs random spells by deciding how they "should" work (which isn't necessarily the same from one casting to another), so actual spellcasting is a crapshoot. I actually tried to play a DFA, by the way, because I saw there was a VoP monk with an LA in the party and thought an uber-wizard would be too much. I was told no.

(By the way, the cleric in the party was lamenting the 3.5 update to haste, because it's just not fair that fighters get extra attacks while spellcasters don't get any extra bonuses, and fighters are already so much better.)

And yeah, I am not a fan of these houserules at all. But I also haven't been able to find any other 3.5 groups that fit my schedule, and I have an OK time even though I do think their houserules are absolutely ridiculous.

I just heavily roleplay a wizard that has a lot of moral codes about what is and is not OK as a spellcaster, and as such focus mostly on buffing my party and utility, so I don't break the game too much and the party is happy. Although when we were facing down an Aspect of Tiamat in a recent game and I got tired of hearing the cleric lament about how there was absolutely NOTHING useful a cleric could do in that situation, I told him to just Shivering Touch the thing and be done with it. He seemed baffled as to why that would help but eventually did, and it dropped the thing in one shot, as you'd expect it to. The DM just kind of spluttered for a while and didn't know how to react. Apparently we weren't actually supposed to fight the thing in the first place.

[Waspinator]

I think 3.5's Psionics gets a bad reputation because previous versions of psionics were terribly written. Which really shouldn't affect opinions of a new version of the rules, but it probably does.

[Snowbluff]

I think 3.5's Psionics gets a bad reputation because previous versions of psionics were terribly written. Which really shouldn't affect opinions of a new version of the rules, but it probably does.

Bad writing is obviously plaguing 3.5 Psi. I don't know how bad 3.0 is, but there is a whole book about poorly written 3.5 Psi. :smallfrown:

[Morcleon]

Bad writing is obviously plaguing 3.5 Psi. I don't know how bad 3.0 is, but there is a whole book about poorly written 3.5 Psi. :smallfrown:

3.0 is pretty bad... I've skimmed it, and it really doesn't make sense... >.<

Hey, did you know, there's also a whole book about poorly written 3.5 Vancian casting? Well, actually, it's more like 10 books... :smallwink:

[TuggyNE]

Bad writing is obviously plaguing 3.5 Psi. I don't know how bad 3.0 is, but there is a whole book about poorly written 3.5 Psi. :smallfrown:

A whole book about it, or a whole book of it?

And 3.0 was, by any standard at all, incomparably worse. Let me see if I can dig up that old rant I've seen....

Ah, here we are:
I have used this model before, but to really appreciate how this "class feature" worked you should see how it would apply if ported to mainstream D&D where they haven't been conditioned to accept inferior mechanics without question. Lets take the big sacred moo, a Cleric's undead turning ability:

DM: "Before we get started, Cleric, I just want you to know that I am instituting some changes in your turn undead class feature that will make your class more different and give it a unique divine mechanic."

Player: "OK. How does it work now?"

DM: "Well, for starters, when you attempt to turn undead you will now have to burn a spell."

Player: "A spell???? What level?"

DM: "Different levels. It depends on what turning mode you want to use. Sanctified Gesture takes a level 1, Divine Dance of Power takes a level 2, High Holly Homina Homina takes a level 3, and...."

Player: "Wait, I assume I will get a bonus on the roll based on the level of spell slot I sacrifice?"

DM: "Sometimes you will. Other times you will get a penalty based on the turning defense mode the opponent selects. Turning and turning defense modes will interact on a table. The table determines the actual DC of the roll, not the level of the spell slot burned. Choosing a given defense mode may actually mean you pay a spell to get a penalty on the save, but it will still be better than being defenseless."

Player: "The undead will get defense modes?"

DM: "Sure, so will you. Each round you will select a turning attack mode and a defense mode. In fact, you will need to select a defense mode against each undead opponent each and every round and each will cost you spell slots."

Player: "Wwwwwwhat????!!!!!! What if I am facing undead who do not cast spells, I assume they won't get to mount a defense?"

DM: "It doesn't matter if you face undead without casting ability because their turning and turning defense modes are free."

Player: "Wait a minute! This is stupid! One of my 3rd level spell slots could be spent on Searing Light which fries undead; why would I ever spend it on an attack mode that might help me on a turning attempt? And why would I ever take a turning defense mode, much less a separate one vs. each undead opponent? I would simply choose to ignore undead or cast spells against them or go at them with weapons. I would have to have brain damage to choose to turn with these rules!"

DM: "If you fail to mount a defense then each unblocked undead gets a special +8 bonus to hit you for having this wonderful class feature and choosing not to use it. They also get to drain your stats if they hit. This will apply also to anyone who adds a level of Cleric; multiclassing will be very flavorful."

Player: "But I am a spellcaster, I need to be able to cast spells. How can I do my job if my spell slots get sucked away every time we run into undead?"

DM: "Well, how can you do your job if you are dead or reduced to a mindless state? You need to use your spells this way or you may not live long enough to cast them anyway."

Player: Head down, silently weeping into his hands.

DM: "I should mention too that you will be able to make turn undead attempts vs. nonundead; if you succeed they will be stunned for a few rounds. Of course, everyone who does not have this feature will get a huge bonus on the save DC. The best part: If you blow a 5th level spell to use High Holy Hokey Pokey then everyone in a large area could be stunned for a long while and they don't get a bonus vs. this one mode -- that makes the entire system usable and balanced."

Player: "They should all be stunned if they ever see me willingly use these rules. This is preposterous! I need my spells to heal and buff and perform all the functions of a Cleric. How am I going to be of any use to the party if I hemorrhage spell slots every time we run into undead?"

DM: "That is the beauty of it: You get to choose whether to use your spell slots as they were intended or save your own hide by using them to turn. Come on and at least give it a chance. It will be a mechanic unique to your class so it must be a benefit. You don't want to be just another spellcaster do you? This will add so much flavor and.... Hey! Get him off of me!"

Player: "How ya like that fist flavor?"

[Ashtagon]

The part of the spell point rules that forces you to augment for blasting needs to be killed with fire. Spells should still scale with level automatically. Then everybody needs to get about half again as many spell points as they do. Then it's an ok system.

This is because full casters are underpowered, right?

[Snowbluff]

Well, it's a good thing I didn't ever have to see that. :smalleek:




Hey, did you know, there's also a whole book about poorly written 3.5 Vancian casting? Well, actually, it's more like 10 books... :smallwink:

3.5 casting books function just fine. Complete Mage and Arcane are really valuable resources, and I can't name a single book specifically about the spell casters that ended up as bad as Complete Psi.

[Morcleon]

3.5 casting books function just fine. Complete Mage and Arcane are really valuable resources, and I can't name a single book specifically about the spell casters that ended up as bad as Complete Psi.

Oh, CPsi? I thought you were talking about XPH. :smalltongue:

Yeah, CPsi has some bad things in there. But the main problem with magic is the large support base coming from these dozens of books, allowing for unseen synergies. Compounding this error is the WotC design principle of ignoring things printed in noncore books when writing a new splatbook.

[Psyren]

Yes, it is an unfortunate sidebar. Almost no one uses it. It doesn't impact the system substantially.

I wouldn't call Psionics Are Different "unfortunate." Done right, it can be very flavorful and make for a truly memorable campaign setting. For example, it could work really well in a land where study of magic is restricted to a few corrupt and wealthy individuals, or a weave-like setting where a single entity controls who can and cannot access its power. It gives a way for the disenfranchised to fight back against their oppressors without needing to introduce a friendly deity, archmage or other powerful figure who could potentially solve the problem themselves without the PCs' aid.

PAD works just as well in reverse - a strange new power that the world's magi and priests can neither identify nor stop, only this time it would be a villain attempting to oppose the good status quo rather than the reverse. Used in the hands of evil, PAD can result in memorable villains - an undetectable body-hopping serial killer, or a puppetmaster politician who secretly enslaves the minds of his rivals to forward his own agenda. By preventing normal detection methods from working, you can force the PCs to get creative and hand them a true mystery to solve.

But even where PAD is used to give psionics a more alien feel, I would personally recommend not removing it entirely. Give Detect Magic a reduced chance to identify a psionic effect, and Dispel Psionics a reduced chance to end a spell, but it should still be nonzero.

[navar100]

A whole book about it, or a whole book of it?

And 3.0 was, by any standard at all, incomparably worse. Let me see if I can dig up that old rant I've seen....

Ah, here we are:

Tee Hee

To be fair, it's not entirely 3.0's fault. This system was in the 2E Psionic's Handbook, the book that brought Psionics into 2E. 3E just converted it to the 3E system, such as getting rid of mTHAC0. I don't know if 1E Psionics had this as well. For 3.5 they finally realized how stupid "psionic combat" was and got rid of it.

[Starbuck_II]

Tee Hee

To be fair, it's not entirely 3.0's fault. This system was in the 2E Psionic's Handbook, the book that brought Psionics into 2E. 3E just converted it to the 3E system, such as getting rid of mTHAC0. I don't know if 1E Psionics had this as well. For 3.5 they finally realized how stupid "psionic combat" was and got rid of it.

I liked 3.0 Psionic Combat, but I found the infinite usage for monsters thing too powerful. I mean, how fair was that?

[Psyren]

"Psionic Combat" can in fact be done right - check Hyperconscious for a much better implementation of the system that is fully 3.5 compatible.

To summarize, the Hyperconscious system is a round-to-round mental check between a psionic attacker and his foe. Winning this check grants the attacker a specialized benefit in the real world combat - such as a bonus to a saving throw vs. that foe, a bonus to melee or ranged attack rolls vs. that foe, a bonus to Tumble checks vs. that foe, or temporary DR/- vs. that foe.

Unlike the 3.0 version, it doesn't cost power points to use, nor is it used in conflicts with non-psionic foes.

[JoshuaZ]

It being a thing will be labeled annoying.
Just one of the many things that didn't work out or should not have been.

So the existence of an optional rule that is almost never used is now annoying?




So first of all, this is purely a complaint about notation and terminology. You are welcome in your campaign to also refer to them as spells. But more to the point, they don't work completely as spells do. For example, some feats only apply to powers and not to spells while others work the other way.

We are not assuming houserules.

Whether you call it a spell or a power in setting isn't a houserule by most notions of the terms.



Well, the thing is that a lot of spell feats and mechanics require slot mechanics. You'll need comparable feats for spells that use spell points, or just have the forethought to fix it. Psionics wasn't integrated thoughtfully enough for the latter so the former is what happened. Except it generated undue confusion and gave them an excuse to fill pages with extraneous information.

I'm confused by what you mean by this. The bit in question wasn't part of the spell points system.



This, pretty much. Psionics are overpowered the same way spellcasting is. I prefer lower power level in general, like in the T3 range.

Ok. So why are we bothering to have a thread about psi being overpowered? You might as well just have a thread about how T1/T2 are overpowered, which a lot of people would agree with. Why single out psionics?

[JusticeZero]

This system was in the 2E Psionic's Handbook, the book that brought Psionics into 2E. 3E just converted it to the 3E system, such as getting rid of mTHAC0. I don't know if 1E Psionics had this as well. For 3.5 they finally realized how stupid "psionic combat" was and got rid of it.
1E had psionics; like all of Gygax's stuff, it was one of several amazingly powerful gimmes that was given free to anyone getting an outlier high roll in chargen.

2E didn't have it to start with, but some people liked all the work that was apparent in the 1E version (and were a bit baffled as to why it was done as a Gygaxism), so they made the Psionics handbook.

mTHACO was not a thing at this point; Psionics were done as skill checks, ie. d20 rolls under the relevant stat, plus-minus modifiers. It also had "power score" (instead of natural 20, but mathematically the same), and specific fumble results. For instance, "To activate this power, you have to roll under Wisdom -4, and any other situational modifiers your GM gives you; if you get it dead on it's extra strong, and if you get a 1 it backfires and blows you up instead." None of the powers scaled in any way, which made for some odd results. Generally it played as "You're useless most of the game, except for when you use a power that breaks the adventure."

In 2e-Player's Option, they rearranged the lists somewhat and changed the check to a mTHACO check. Still didn't scale.

Both incarnations of 2e, "psionic combat" was mostly just an excuse to get an extra telepathic blaster/control power.

3.0e, 3.5e, and PF have all taken swings at the rules since then.

[Snowbluff]

So the existence of an optional rule that is almost never used is now annoying?It's in use. There is no denying that. Stating how often would require a proper sample that neither of us have.



Whether you call it a spell or a power in setting isn't a houserule by most notions of the terms.
Exactly. We are stuck with the lousy use of extraneous terminology.



I'm confused by what you mean by this. The bit in question wasn't part of the spell points system.I was talking about them using the word "spell" in place of "power", and how simple it would have to been to reduce any confusion. You would need some feats to fill in the rules for the PP system, but the rest of the rules would not cause unintentional problems, since a primary factor of spell mechanics are spell slot use and spell type (Arcane, Divine).


Ok. So why are we bothering to have a thread about psi being overpowered? You might as well just have a thread about how T1/T2 are overpowered, which a lot of people would agree with. Why single out psionics?
I perceive a general illusion that the material is improperly represented. I dislike psionics because of these reasons. People tend to disregard claims made against the system on the grounds of unfamiliarity, even if people believe there are genuine issues with the system.

[Spuddles]

You havent presented any genuine problems with the system, though.

[Aquillion]

You havent presented any genuine problems with the system, though.I think they're just saying "yes, I know Psionics is weaker than spellcasting, but it's still ridiculously strong, since it's a type of full casting."

Which is true but irrelevant to what people usually argue over.

[Aquillion]

3.5 casting books function just fine. Complete Mage and Arcane are really valuable resources, and I can't name a single book specifically about the spell casters that ended up as bad as Complete Psi.Are we counting the Tome of Magic, or just pretending it doesn't exist?

(I'm totally fine with pretending it doesn't exist.)

[Psyren]

Are we counting the Tome of Magic, or just pretending it doesn't exist?

(I'm totally fine with pretending it doesn't exist.)

If you want to get technical, there are no spellcasters in that book though.

[JoshuaZ]

Are we counting the Tome of Magic, or just pretending it doesn't exist?

(I'm totally fine with pretending it doesn't exist.)

Tome of Magic is definitely better than Complete Psi. ToM has the binder which is balanced and has the best interplay between mechanics and fluff of any 3.5 base class. The shadowcaster is a little on the weak side, and the mechanics doesn't exactly say shadow in any useful way, but is ok. So what's the issue?

No, there isn't any third section in that book. Nope. *lalaha* *I can't hear you.*

[Snowbluff]

You havent presented any genuine problems with the system, though.Lack of compontents. At higher level of optimization, the Wizard is an Incantatrix with Silent/Still/Invisible, but at practical play this is more of an issue. Ever need to be really quiet, and then the wizard suddenly has to remind you through sign language that he needs to speak aloud to cast the spell you want? Pretty much every time a component comes up, you should have brought a psion.

Also, I found out about the Ardent today. It's CPsi, so we've already been over it.

If you want to get technical, there are no spellcasters in that book though.There are no casters in that book, indeed.

Well, there a few spells in the Tru-



No, there isn't any third section in that book. Nope. *lalaha* *I can't hear you.*
Oh, right. :smalltongue:

[Threadnaught]

I'm shocked snowbluff, creating this thread and claiming Psionics as even more overpowered than magic.
I'm amazed that partway through the very first post, you have several points which people are able to effortlessly disprove.

Nah, not really. I look forward to what bits of your posts people quote and how they can disprove you.


Tome of Magic is definitely better than Complete Psi. ToM has the binder which is balanced and has the best interplay between mechanics and fluff of any 3.5 base class. The shadowcaster is a little on the weak side, and the mechanics doesn't exactly say shadow in any useful way, but is ok. So what's the issue?

No, there isn't any third section in that book. Nope. *lalaha* *I can't hear you.*

Aren't you missing the Truenamer?

[TuggyNE]

Aren't you missing the Truenamer?

Ahem (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DontExplainTheJoke). I regret nothing!

[Threadnaught]

Ahem (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DontExplainTheJoke). I regret nothing!

Actually. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/ComicallyMissingThePoint) You may want to read that again.

[Snowbluff]

I'm shocked snowbluff, creating this thread and claiming Psionics as even more overpowered than magic.
I'm amazed that partway through the very first post, you have several points which people are able to effortlessly disprove.


I can't tell if you're being serious or not. Is this what it's like trying to talk to me? :smalltongue:

Still waiting for an actual rebuttal for StP other than "no one does that". Due to mimicry spells, it exceedingly easy to pull off a lot of TO spell tricks. In practical play, Psionics functions better due to lack of components, which Psyren has touch on.

[Psyren]

All right, I gather you want a more detailed response to your OP. Very well:



1) No components. I mean, at least you can cut out a wizard's tongue to keep him from teleporting. The components are supposed to act as a form of weakness. It doesn't work all the time, but keep this in mind.

Lack of components can indeed be a problem in a low-level/low-magic environment. Restraining a psion in such a setting is indeed going to be difficult, particularly a Nomad or Egoist.

But this is a typical problem in many fantasy works anyway. Take Wheel of Time; restraining an Aes Sedai would be practically impossible without the Three Oaths, or keeping her constantly drugged/incapacitated. Not all magic systems follow the verbal-somatic-material trinity, nor do all of them need to.

As for D&D in particular, psions have it harder than spellcasters in many ways. Flight and Teleportation come online later. Other techniques, like Invisibility and disguises, are right out. A telepath can get her guards to unlock her cell, but she can't leave an illusion or summoned minion behind to fool anyone. Furthermore, shutting off manifesting is easier than shutting off magic - Catapsi and Psionic Shackles are much cheaper than AMF and Antimagic Shackles.



2) Every power can be ninth level. This isn't so bad, but keep in mind that a Wizard can not use Heighten to Summon Monster I to Summon Monster IX.

It's true that it's harder for a caster to make use of his lower-level slots the way a psion can. But to your specific example, Astral Construct and the other smattering of metacreativity summons are a pale shadow of what SM and SNA are capable of. All AC can do is summon a beatstick - a powerful one to be sure, but the magical summons get you far more utility. You can gain access to things like healing, recon, dimensional travel, battlefield control, illusions, enchantments, various immunities - and all of that is before we get into the Calling spells. No psionic summon can match the power or utility of Planar Binding, Ally, or Gate.



Augmentation is a cool rule, it just is messed up sometimes. We have a double standard when it comes to it. Using augmentation to your advantage? Fine, it's a strength of the system. Subverting MM costs, a strength of magic? Cheese.

Subverting metamagic is cheese. It's far more powerful than augmentation; augmenting may result in more high-end powers/day, but spellcasters still have the advantage thanks to autoscaling. For a psion to be able to use many of his powers effectively, he HAS to augment them - meanwhile, a level 15 Wizard can throw around unheightened Fireballs and still get full damage out of them. No-save spells are even worse.



3) Psi/Magic Transparency. This should never have been a rule because it should have like this already. There is no reason Powers should not functions as spells for everything.

This was already addressed: (1) transparency is the default rule, and (2) there are plenty of reasons why a DM would want to tweak this or remove it entirely. Just because you can't think of any doesn't mean no one else can - it just means the Psionics Are Different variant isn't meant for you.

Regarding StP Erudite - it's strong because the wizard list in general is strong. Any class that gets unrestricted access to that list is going to be T1, e.g. Sha'ir.



XPH is overpowered for the same reasons PHB is. You'll be hard pressed to find a similar density of strong material. I mean, PHB has 3 T1 and 1 T2 class. XPH pretty much supplies the backing behind a T1 and T2. What the heck?

What? No it's not. The XPH has zero T1 classes; the PHB has 3. The XPH has one T5 class, the PHB again has 3.



Oh, and 4) Most players don't know anything about psionics.

This has nothing to do with the system itself.

[Augmental]

Wait a minute. I thought this was a joke thread? :smallconfused:

[Karnith]

Wait a minute. I thought this was a joke thread? :smallconfused:
It's not a joke thread. It's a Snowbluff thread. You could be forgiven for not knowing the difference between the two. Here's an unsalted wheat cracker for your trouble, though: (::)Am I doing it right?

[Renen]

The fact that people think a serious thread is a joke thread, shows just how stupid the thread really is.

[Snowbluff]

But this is a typical problem in many fantasy works anyway. Take Wheel of Time; restraining an Aes Sedai would be practically impossible without the Three Oaths, or keeping her constantly drugged/incapacitated. Not all magic systems follow the verbal-somatic-material trinity, nor do all of them need to.Thank for providing an actual response. (::)

The problem is that the components act as a balancing point for lower level/power play. A deafened/silenced/restrained/spell-pouchless wizard is not able to function at full capacity.


As for D&D in particular, psions have it harder than spellcasters in many ways. Flight and Teleportation come online later. Other techniques, like Invisibility and disguises, are right out. A telepath can get her guards to unlock her cell, but she can't leave an illusion or summoned minion behind to fool anyone. Furthermore, shutting off manifesting is easier than shutting off magic - Catapsi and Psionic Shackles are much cheaper than AMF and Antimagic Shackles. Well, how do you determine the target is a Psion in the first place? Displays can be subverted with a concentration check, so you would have to move past the cursory glance that betrays a wizard or other caster. Manifesting Detect Psionics would help, but would only really work after you have your target secured. The psion is really quite stealthy as-is.


All AC can do is summon a beatstick - a powerful one to be sure, but the magical summons get you far more utility. You can gain access to things like healing, recon, dimensional travel, battlefield control, illusions, enchantments, various immunities - and all of that is before we get into the Calling spells. No psionic summon can match the power or utility of Planar Binding, Ally, or Gate. Astral Construct can also be used to trigger traps and as a distraction. I think it's one of the more useful lower level powers. You might even be able to disguise one as you for a short time in your cell when you escape (which is unlikely). It's not summoning casting creatures good, but that's really not what it comes to in the lower level games. At higher levels it still functions at all, which is more than can be said for most 1st level spells. It also doesn't share weaknesses with summoned creatures, keeping in line with my worse-and-better opinion on psionics.


Subverting metamagic is cheese. It's far more powerful than augmentation; augmenting may result in more high-end powers/day, but spellcasters still have the advantage thanks to autoscaling. For a psion to be able to use many of his powers effectively, he HAS to augment them - meanwhile, a level 15 Wizard can throw around unheightened Fireballs and still get full damage out of them. No-save spells are even worse.
Hmm... granted. Still, lower level powers can provide more use than higher level ones. I attribute this to bad writing more than anything.

How do you address the psionic action economy you mentioned earlier?

This was already addressed: (1) transparency is the default rule, and (2) there are plenty of reasons why a DM would want to tweak this or remove it entirely. Just because you can't think of any doesn't mean no one else can - it just means the Psionics Are Different variant isn't meant for you.My issue is with the wording and integration of rules. I think it could have been better. I have nothing with the PaDV other than it adding layers of complexity that I will not concern myself with, which is fine.


Regarding StP Erudite - it's strong because the wizard list in general is strong. Any class that gets unrestricted access to that list is going to be T1, e.g. Sha'ir.
Exactly.


What? No it's not. The XPH has zero T1 classes; the PHB has 3. The XPH has one T5 class, the PHB again has 3.

I was referring to the Erudite drawing it's list from the XPH as well.


It's not a joke thread. It's a Snowbluff thread. You could be forgiven for not knowing the difference between the two. Here's an unsalted wheat cracker for your trouble, though: (::)The cracker should be blue as well if you aren't actually giving him one. :smalltongue: The meaning of the cracker is actually intentionally ambiguous.

[Threadnaught]

It's not a joke thread. It's a Snowbluff thread. You could be forgiven for not knowing the difference between the two. Here's an unsalted wheat cracker for your trouble, though: (::)Am I doing it right?

Are you implying that Snowbluff should not be taken seriously?
Wait, what am I saying, that's the reason he's on my ignore list and I'm relying on other posters' quotes to get his side of the discussion. :smallbiggrin:


In all seriousness, I dislike Psionics because after some intense reading. The Psion is like a Wizard being forced to specialize, with specialization involving the sacrifice of all other magical abilities.
Congratulations you're a Diviner, you get to know stuff but can cast nothing else. Abjurer, you can protect yourself but not attack or control the battlefield. Necromancy, yes you can weaken and damage enemies, but you have no protection at all.
The Wilder is far more versatile, but it's also horribly limited. Magic is just so much easier and more convenient to prepare, which is fantastic for DMs.

[Snowbluff]

Are you implying that Snowbluff should not be taken seriously?
Wait, what am I saying, that's the reason he's on my ignore list and I'm relying on other posters' quotes to get his side of the discussion. :smallbiggrin:Wait, you're that Threadnaught? Dude, you made assumptions that you could not verify, quoted circumstance rather than rules, and tried to tell me monks had value. :smallannoyed:

... whatever. I'll ask you to stay on topic unless what you have to say is really funny.

In all seriousness, I dislike Psionics because after some intense reading. The Psion is like a Wizard being forced to specialize, with specialization involving the sacrifice of all other magical abilities.
*snipped*
The Wilder is far more versatile, but it's also horribly limited. Magic is just so much easier and more convenient to prepare, which is fantastic for DMs.
The Wilder has the same Power list as the Psion, but does not get access to the Discipline Powers, if I am reading this right. :smallwink:

[eggynack]

This seems like the kind of argument that can be pretty easily split down the middle. The first question being asked is: is the psionics system overpowered? That question is a bit of a misdirection. First of all, the idea of something being overpowered doesn't make any sense when everyone can pick classes. There is no class in the game so powerful that it can't be balanced in some kind of group (For this I'm considering classes on their base level. If your character is pun pun, then it kinda invalidates just about any campaign). Wizards aren't overpowered in a party of a wizard a cleric and a druid. Furthermore, saying that classes more powerful than a warblade are overpowered is somewhat arbitrary, as you could just as easily say that wizards are balanced and that anything weaker is underpowered. That being said, for the sake of this discussion setting tier 3 as a balance point seems alright. I'm not saying that it has to be the balance point, just that that's a premise I'm working off of for the next part of the argument.

The second issue with your claim that psionics is overpowered, is that systems in D&D don't tend to be intrinsically overpowered so much as the classes based on them are. Wizards and beguilers are effectively operating under the same casting system, but the former is much more powerful. If you want to pair the mechanics more, favored soul is a spontaneous caster off the divine list, and so is the healer. The former is 3 tiers greater in power. Based on the previous metric of power, clerics are overpowered, and healers are underpowered. The divine casting itself isn't overpowered or underpowered, its classes are. Extending this to psionics, the classes fall just about everywhere. StP erudite is overpowered, psion is just barely overpowered, and psychic warrior is balanced. I don't think soulknifes count, but they're in the same book and are terrible. Psionics is neither overpowered nor underpowered. I could easily construct a class using the psionics system that would fall into tier 6 (it's like a commoner, but it can eventually use one crappy psionic power. It's arbitrary, but there ya go.).

Your second point is that psionics is annoying. To that I say, "sure, I guess." You haven't really come up with many examples of psionics being annoying that doesn't involve crazy misunderstandings. I suppose they don't require components, but that doesn't really seem that crazy to me. Still, you're entitled to that opinion. That's all it is though, and isn't really worth arguing. From a semantic standpoint, it should be, "I am annoyed by psionics," rather than, "Psionics is annoying." I assume you mean the latter, because the former is a bit on the crazy side. The idea of something being objectively annoying just doesn't make much sense.

[nedz]

1E had psionics; like all of Gygax's stuff, it was one of several amazingly powerful gimmes that was given free to anyone getting an outlier high roll in chargen.

2E didn't have it to start with, but some people liked all the work that was apparent in the 1E version (and were a bit baffled as to why it was done as a Gygaxism), so they made the Psionics handbook.

mTHACO was not a thing at this point; Psionics were done as skill checks, ie. d20 rolls under the relevant stat, plus-minus modifiers. It also had "power score" (instead of natural 20, but mathematically the same), and specific fumble results. For instance, "To activate this power, you have to roll under Wisdom -4, and any other situational modifiers your GM gives you; if you get it dead on it's extra strong, and if you get a 1 it backfires and blows you up instead." None of the powers scaled in any way, which made for some odd results. Generally it played as "You're useless most of the game, except for when you use a power that breaks the adventure."

In 2e-Player's Option, they rearranged the lists somewhat and changed the check to a mTHACO check. Still didn't scale.

Both incarnations of 2e, "psionic combat" was mostly just an excuse to get an extra telepathic blaster/control power.

3.0e, 3.5e, and PF have all taken swings at the rules since then.

Whilst tuggyne's quote of AntiDjinn does imply that this is indeed talking about a bad hack of 1E's psionics system your comments about the 1E version are a little wide of the mark.

Basically if you were 'lucky' enough to generate a psionic character you would then roll a dice, with a few modifiers, to determine your points. If you happened to roll low for power (d% note) then you had a character who might have a few once/day powers, but would be dead as soon as a psionic monster showed up.

All available powers, including attack and defence modes, where determined randomly (more d%s): so even if you had a lot of power points it was a crap-shoot as to whether you could actually do anything useful with them. I have seen weak psionic characters with lots of abilities, and conversely characters with lots of power, but not much to spend them on.

Given that most psionic characters would typically have only one or two of the possible 5 attack and defence modes there wasn't too much in the way of tactics involved.

Psionic combat also took place segment by segment rather than round by round (~10 Segments = 1 round): so basically, in game time, the psionic combat would likely be over before the non psionic characters got to act. At the table this meant that the players of the non-psionic characters would sit around eating pop-corn whilst their psionic comrades fried or died.

So to summarise: it was like 3d6 in order, with d%s. Unsurprisingly no one who knew anything about the system wanted to be 'lucky' enough to roll a psionic character.

[Snowbluff]

*snip*My basis for regular play is the lack of components. Psions are like F22s. Silent and deadly.

For non-regular, TO play, there really isn't a question about it being overpowered like the casting types are.

Extending this to psionics, the classes fall just about everywhere. StP erudite is overpowered, psion is just barely overpowered, and psychic warrior is balanced. I don't think soulknifes count, but they're in the same book and are terrible. Psionics is neither overpowered nor underpowered. I could easily construct a class using the psionics system that would fall into tier 6 (it's like a commoner, but it can eventually use one crappy psionic power. It's arbitrary, but there ya go.).
Exception to every rule. Casting is overpowered because Wizards are present. The more balanced alternative make the exception.

The idea of something being objectively annoying just doesn't make much sense.:smallconfused:

Adjective
Causing irritation or annoyance: "annoying habits".
...not sure if something can be objectively annoying, but if it's causing annoyance, there is nothing wrong with my statement.

Here's a cursory list of annoying things in Psi:
Ardent ML based learning
Divine Mind being "divine"
Use of the word "power"
StP Erudite
Lack of Components
Ectoplasmic Goo


On a side note, someone else is going to have to tell Threadnaught to be productive, aren't they? :smallconfused:

[Psyren]

The problem is that the components act as a balancing point for lower level/power play. A deafened/silenced/restrained/spell-pouchless wizard is not able to function at full capacity.

Those are plot balance points, not gaming ones. If the PCs (or NPCs) getting locked up is something that happens frequently at your table, just come up with some way to keep them restrained. Antimagic, or psionic shackles, or even some kind of custom macguffin. Or simply come up with some other way to hold them; threaten someone they care about. Beat them up and recapture them with overwhelming force. Make their cell noisy/uncomfortable/inhospitable enough to prevent proper rest and regaining of PP. You've got a lot of options.

Incarceration is not a standard feature of D&D - the game is designed for high-fantasy, swashbuckling, dungeon-delving and treasure-hunting. There's some world-building info but none of that is meant to stand on its own without a little help from the DM - that's as true for psionics as it is any other system. Hell, locking up a Totemist is next to impossible too, that doesn't mean Incarnum is broken.
You're making a mountain out of a molehill here.



Well, how do you determine the target is a Psion in the first place?

Detect Magic and Detect Psionics can both identify psionic ability in a creature even if it is not being actively used. It takes a single round to do so. And both can be permanencied or placed in items. I would imagine that the king or some other important personage would have a reason to be scanning supplicants anyway, to make sure they don't have magic items or active spells on them.

You can also get a check to identify a power if you make a saving throw.



Astral Construct can also be used to trigger traps and as a distraction. I think it's one of the more useful lower level powers.

So can SM1/SNA1. And of course there's a lot more support out there for dedicated summoners than dedicated shapers. And thanks to Calling, spellcasters can guarantee long-term service much more easily, even if they have to pay for the privilege.



You might even be able to disguise one as you for a short time in your cell when you escape (which is unlikely).

No, you can't. You can sculpt it's shape certainly (which requires a suitable check), but you can never hide the fact that it's made of ectoplasm. So unless you look like ectoplasm too, you're not fooling anyone.


It's not summoning casting creatures good, but that's really not what it comes to in the lower level games.

In lower level games it comes down to things like grappling and tripping, which summons do just as well as ACs.



At higher levels it still functions at all, which is more than can be said for most 1st level spells.

Most, but not all. There are plenty of low level spells that remain useful at higher levels, e.g. Glitterdust to reveal invisible foes. And SM1 can trigger traps just fine too.

Besides - Wizards and Clerics may get comparatively fewer high-level slots, but they get much more powerful ones. A single Gate or Shapechange is better than almost any power a psion gets (and only one psion can get a comparative ability to the latter.) Wizards and Clerics also get the almighty Astral Projection (and even get it much earlier via Planar Binding) while Psions don't.



It also doesn't share weaknesses with summoned creatures, keeping in line with my worse-and-better opinion on psionics.

The term you're groping for is "different" - not "worse-and-better." Psionics is neither.



Hmm... granted. Still, lower level powers can provide more use than higher level ones. I attribute this to bad writing more than anything.

Augmenting a low-level power is functionally identical to using a higher-level one. You're simply consolidating lower-level "slots" to eke out additional fuel. It's not "bad writing" and it's not a bug - the system was specifically designed that way and nothing is wrong with it, provided the DM is using an appropriate number and difficulty of encounters per day. If s/he is not, then it's easy to think that psionics is more powerful than it should be.

Note that augmentation also runs you into problems like Globe of Invulnerability - augmentation doesn't actually change a power's level, so powering up a 20 ML Energy Missile or Psionic Blast won't stop them from getting shut down automatically.



How do you address the psionic action economy you mentioned earlier?

I don't. It's one of the things psionics is better at. There's plenty it's worse at. Again, the system as a whole is not worse or better than magic - it's just different. Why is that a problem?



My issue is with the wording and integration of rules. I think it could have been better.

Then make it better. D&D is a living game. Variants are simply suggestions, it's up to the DM to finish the job.



I was referring to the Erudite drawing it's list from the XPH as well.

Even if they learned every single power and spell in the game automatically, they are still limited by both PP and UPD.

EDIT:



Here's a list of annoying things in Psi:
Ardent ML based learning
Divine Mind being "divine"
Use of the word "power"
StP Erudite
Lack of Components
Ectoplasmic Goo

1) This is a result of poor editing but isn't actually broken. It simply makes Ardents more multiclass-friendly. Because of the amount of ammunition you lose actually taking advantage of this trick, they end up roughly on par with where they were.

2) This is a fluff issue and not a fault of psionics itself. In attempting to broaden psionics' appeal to folks that wanted gods involved, WotC forgot what made it unique.

3) What's wrong with "power?"

4) There are tons of poorly-thought out variants and classes in 3.5. Arcane Swordsage. Cloistered Cleric. Planar Shepherd. Dweomerkeeper. Anything to do with Taint. This is again not a problem with Psionics.

5) See above for components discussion.

6) What's wrong with ectoplasm?

[Snowbluff]

*snip*
Just incarceration? Only during plot? I am talking about ambushes and crowd control here. Being able to hide in plain sight is valuable. Being able to work without being noticed is very valuable. Being able to fight in less than ideal conditions is very valuable. Casting is mechanically inferior to psionics in this manner.




Detect Magic and Detect Psionics can both identify psionic ability in a creature even if it is not being actively used. It takes a single round to do so. And both can be permanencied or placed in items. I would imagine that the king or some other important personage would have a reason to be scanning supplicants anyway, to make sure they don't have magic items or active spells on them.
Avoiding checkpoints is the job of the player, then. A wizard would have been captured before that point.

You can also get a check to identify a power if you make a saving throw.

Do you get its source?



No, you can't. You can sculpt it's shape certainly (which requires a suitable check), but you can never hide the fact that it's made of ectoplasm. So unless you look like ectoplasm too, you're not fooling anyone.
No, I mean put some clothes and a wig on it and make a disguise check. Can they not wear wigs?



The term you're groping for is "different" - not "worse-and-better." Psionics is neither.
I am referring to how certain powers mirror spells but have a drawback and a benefit to their spell counterparts and vice versa.

Augmenting a low-level power is functionally identical to using a higher-level one. You're simply consolidating lower-level "slots" to eke out additional fuel. It's not "bad writing" and it's not a bug - the system was specifically designed that way and nothing is wrong with it, provided the DM is using an appropriate number and difficulty of encounters per day. If s/he is not, then it's easy to think that psionics is more powerful than it should be.I am referring to the poorly written augmentation rules. Duration scales, but other things do not arbitrarily.


Note that augmentation also runs you into problems like Globe of Invulnerability - augmentation doesn't actually change a power's level, so powering up a 20 ML Energy Missile or Psionic Blast won't stop them from getting shut down automatically.Read what you said about keeping a wizard from casting. It sounds an awful like what I was complaining about.


Then make it better. D&D is a living game. Variants are simply suggestions, it's up to the DM to finish the job.
This is about the system before it hits the table. I do realize it can be altered at the players see fit, but I am talking about the system.

If you have a finger-wiggling homebrew for Psi, I'd be happy to hear it.


Even if they learned every single power and spell in the game automatically, they are still limited by both PP and UPD.

PP? Since when has PP been an issue? In TO, you can use your Infinite PP tricks. :smallconfused:



1) This is a result of poor editing but isn't actually broken. It simply makes Ardents more multiclass-friendly. Because of the amount of ammunition you lose actually taking advantage of this trick, they end up roughly on par with where they were.Okay, remember to tell your Sorcerers that they can choose spells based on their CL, not their levels in sorcerer. It will make them more multiclass friendly.


2) This is a fluff issue and not a fault of psionics itself. In attempting to broaden psionics' appeal to folks that wanted gods involved, WotC forgot what made it unique.If it's a part of Psi and it annoys me, it gets listed of annoying.


3) What's wrong with "power?"The need to write the transparency note. Every problem ever caused by the wording.


4) There are tons of poorly-thought out variants and classes in 3.5. Arcane Swordsage. Cloistered Cleric. Planar Shepherd. Dweomerkeeper. Anything to do with Taint. This is again not a problem with Psionics.They annoy me, too. StP is the relevant problem here.

6) What's wrong with ectoplasm?It's messy. :smalltongue:

[Morcleon]

In all seriousness, I dislike Psionics because after some intense reading. The Psion is like a Wizard being forced to specialize, with specialization involving the sacrifice of all other magical abilities.
Congratulations you're a Diviner, you get to know stuff but can cast nothing else. Abjurer, you can protect yourself but not attack or control the battlefield. Necromancy, yes you can weaken and damage enemies, but you have no protection at all.
The Wilder is far more versatile, but it's also horribly limited. Magic is just so much easier and more convenient to prepare, which is fantastic for DMs.

Um... no? The Psion gets 36 powers at level 20 with access to all powers on the Psion/Wilder list, as well as the 10-11 powers on their discipline list. They are not limited to only the powers of their discipline, and can take powers of any discipline, provided they are not part of the special discipline lists?

Wilders only get 11 powers, and only from the Psion/Wilder list. How exactly is this more versatility?

Magic isn't easier to prepare for. Barring use of Erudite and the Metaconcert trick, it's actually easier to prepare for psionics, as all psionic classes have a set powers known list, whereas prepared casters can change their spell outlay daily and on the fly.

Also, there are several thousand spells out there, and only a few hundred powers. It's a much smaller pool of options.


It's messy. :smalltongue:

What about things like bat guano and saffron/fat ointments and eyeballs and other spell components? :smalltongue:

[Snowbluff]

What about things like bat guano and saffron/fat ointments and eyeballs and other spell components? :smalltongue:
It doesn't get everywhere like the goo does. At least the guano is probably in a vial, psions just barf goo when they use certain powers. Yuck. :smallsmile:

[Morcleon]

It doesn't get everywhere like the goo does. At least the guano is probably in a vial, psions just barf goo when they use certain powers. Yuck. :smallsmile:

Name one power in which goo is actually barfed. :smallbiggrin:

[JoshuaZ]

Um... no? The Psion gets 36 powers at level 20 with access to all powers on the Psion/Wilder list, as well as the 10-11 powers on their discipline list. They are not limited to only the powers of their discipline, and can take powers of any discipline, provided they are not part of the special discipline lists?

Wilders only get 11 powers, and only from the Psion/Wilder list. How exactly is this more versatility?
.

I suspect that this confusion was due to the multiple uses of the word "discipline" rather than some other word. Discipline refers to both a specific large set of powers (equivalent to magic's schools) and to the specific narrow list that can only be taken by someone who focuses on that discipline. If one hasn't done much with the system, that's an easy mistake to make. The notation is bad.

Now, back to the main entertainment:



Just incarceration? Only during plot? I am talking about ambushes and crowd control here. Being able to hide in plain sight is valuable. Being able to work without being noticed is very valuable. Being able to fight in less than ideal conditions is very valuable. Casting is mechanically inferior to psionics in this manner.

This is a marginally valid point. Although a wizard can hide in plain sight about as well if they have eschew material components or if they use spells whose expensive material components are normal things to have around. And in a large crowd, a wizard and a psion will look about the same.




Avoiding checkpoints is the job of the player, then. A wizard would have been captured before that point.

This does not follow.


I am referring to how certain powers mirror spells but have a drawback and a benefit to their spell counterparts and vice versa.

Yes, I think Psyren is correct here. The word you are looking for is "different."



I am referring to the poorly written augmentation rules. Duration scales, but other things do not arbitrarily.

Yes, not everything scales. That's part of the way it works. This is a balance issue. If you had to pay power points to increase power duration, psionists who focused on buffs would run out of pp way too soon.


PP? Since when has PP been an issue? In TO, you can use your Infinite PP tricks.

This is like saying there's a problem with kobolds or paladins because both of them can quickly lead to Pun-Pun.


The need to write the transparency note. Every problem ever caused by the wording.

Do you have a similar problem with warlock abilities being called invocations and shadowcaster abilities being called mysteries?

[Snowbluff]

Hiding requires Eschew, and the Silent and Still Metamagic. Psions have this for free and with no meta cost.


Name one power in which goo is actually barfed. :smallbiggrin:
Okay, Morc.:smalltongue:



Do you have a similar problem with warlock abilities being called invocations and shadowcaster abilities being called mysteries?

Of course not. There is a functional difference between a invocation and an SLA. Warlock invocations have somatic components. While it's possible to have a spell with no components, like a power, SLA do not have somatic components.

I never use Shadow Magic, honestly. Last time I checked, it's another section written in a way to kill trees.

Lastly, I am willing to have a productive discussion, but I will ask you to refrain from referring to me in an inflammatory manner.

[Morcleon]

Okay, Morc.:smalltongue:

... *pout* :smallannoyed:

Anyway, no power creates goo as an undesirable side effect. Also, ectoplasm evaporates rather quickly. :smalltongue:

[Psyren]

Just incarceration? Only during plot? I am talking about ambushes and crowd control here. Being able to hide in plain sight is valuable. Being able to work without being noticed is very valuable. Being able to fight in less than ideal conditions is very valuable. Casting is mechanically inferior to psionics in this manner.

In an ambush scenario, you can cast during the surprise round just as easily as you can manifest in it, so I'm not seeing the issue there. Even if they detect you, they won't be able to stop you unless they have a contingency or something running.

Also, technically you can "cast up your sleeve" when you need to be stealthy, using the rule from Races of Stone/Rules Compendium. It's not perfect, but wizards and sorcerers do have the option, and no consequence for failure (which means no reason not to try.)



Avoiding checkpoints is the job of the player, then. A wizard would have been captured before that point.

How? You can't detect that someone is a Wizard or even a Sorcerer by scanning them, the way you can with a Psion. All manifesters can be spotted by other manifesters in seconds; you need a setting-specific feat to prevent this.



Do you get its source?

No, but you don't get that information with a magic save either.



No, I mean put some clothes and a wig on it and make a disguise check. Can they not wear wigs?

Where would you get all that in jail?

And with an illusion, you could do all that without needing materials at all. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0295.html)



I am referring to how certain powers mirror spells but have a drawback and a benefit to their spell counterparts and vice versa.
I am referring to the poorly written augmentation rules. Duration scales, but other things do not arbitrarily.

Of course it's arbitrary. Arbitrarity is the best way to keep things balanced; blanket conditions are what allow for loopholes and unforeseen interactions. Merely being arbitrary is not a negative in and of itself.

They tried to not be arbitrary in the Spell Points system, and it turned out even worse.

And how are the augmentation rules poorly-written? They make perfect sense.



Read what you said about keeping a wizard from casting. It sounds an awful like what I was complaining about.
...
This is about the system before it hits the table. I do realize it can be altered at the players see fit, but I am talking about the system.

If what you want is a perfect system before it hits the table, then I hope you're prepared to be disappointed with every tabletop system ever created. Psionics is no exception.



PP? Since when has PP been an issue? In TO, you can use your Infinite PP tricks. :smallconfused:

In TO you can get infinite Wishes at level 1, or chain-Gate solars. Is that Psionics' fault too?



Okay, remember to tell your Sorcerers that they can choose spells based on their CL, not their levels in sorcerer. It will make them more multiclass friendly.

Would they change tiers if I did? :smallconfused:

In any event - powers are, in general, less quadratic than spells; The gap between Summon Monster V and Summon Monster I is much larger than the gap between a 9PP Astral Construct and a 1PP version. So having this option is less of an issue for Ardents than it is for Sorcerers.

And again, if you don't like it that much, just make them progress in sequence like Psions do. It's not hard.



If it's a part of Psi and it annoys me, it gets listed of annoying.

Fair enough, I can't change what annoys you. But I can still observe molehills and the construction of mountains therefrom.



It's messy. :smalltongue:

Actually, it's very volatile and evaporates in seconds (if not being actively maintained, e.g. as an astral construct.)

[JoshuaZ]

Hiding requires Eschew, and the Silent and Still Metamagic.

No it doesn't. Hiding while wanting to cast certain spells does. And a psion needs to make a check to suppress displays. And since your primary example was hiding in a "crowd" where presumably they aren't doing full body searches, this is all not very relevant.



Of course not. There is a functional difference between a invocation and an SLA. Warlock invocations have somatic components. While it's possible to have a spell with no components, like a power, SLA do not have somatic components.



And there's a functional difference between a power and a spell. In fact, many of of the parts of that functional difference are things you are apparently complaining about.

[eggynack]

My basis for regular play is the lack of components. Psions are like F22s. Silent and deadly.

For non-regular, TO play, there really isn't a question about it being overpowered like the casting types are.
Exception to every rule. Casting is overpowered because Wizards are present. The more balanced alternative make the exception.
Casting isn't overpowered because wizards are present. Wizards are overpowered because wizards are present. Further, this argument ignores the fact that the term "Overpowered" is intrinsically meaningless. Psions have a generally accepted level of power, and if that's a level of power that is too much for the games you play, then that's how you operate. If you have some sort of claim that refutes the idea that psions are tier 2, I suppose you can present that.


...not sure if something can be objectively annoying, but if it's causing annoyance, there is nothing wrong with my statement.

Here's a cursory list of annoying things in Psi:
Ardent ML based learning
Divine Mind being "divine"
Use of the word "power"
StP Erudite
Lack of Components
Ectoplasmic Goo


My point is that this isn't a list of annoying things about psi, it's a list of things that you think are annoying about psi. The former implies that it's a universal truth and can be argued as such, while the latter is an opinion that can't really be argued. Given that the idea of "annoying" is an inherently subjective one, your claims can only ever fall into the latter category. By the powers of logic, the idea of psionics being annoying is therefore a pointless thing to argue.

[Snowbluff]

... *pout* :smallannoyed:

Anyway, no power creates goo as an undesirable side effect. Also, ectoplasm evaporates rather quickly. :smalltongue:It's totally goo. :smalltongue:

It does, but it's messy when it's there.

In an ambush scenario, you can cast during the surprise round just as easily as you can manifest in it, so I'm not seeing the issue there. Even if they detect you, they won't be able to stop you unless they have a contingency or something running.
[QUOTE]
Also, technically you can "cast up your sleeve" when you need to be stealthy, using the rule from Races of Stone/Rules Compendium. It's not perfect, but wizards and sorcerers do have the option, and no consequence for failure (which means no reason not to try.)
Yeah, with the oppposed check (which isn't so bad) and cross class skill, it is less powerful. :smallfrown:

RoS Page 133.



How? You can't detect that someone is a Wizard or even a Sorcerer by scanning them, the way you can with a Psion. All manifesters can be spotted by other manifesters in seconds; you need a setting-specific feat to prevent this.
If they want to cast, they use components. Having a pouch also identifies a caster, and the SoH rule doesn't cover using Material Components.



No, but you don't get that information with a magic save either.
I see. This is to balance against the lack of components? Where with Spellcraft you have to see it be cast, you can identify a power with during a save.



Where would you get all that in jail?
My disguise kit they locked up in the evidence locker. The real issue is that I have no ranks in disguise. :smallfrown:



Of course it's arbitrary. Arbitrarity is the best way to keep things balanced; blanket conditions are what allow for loopholes and unforeseen interactions. Merely being arbitrary is not a negative in and of itself.

And how are the augmentation rules poorly-written? They make perfect sense.The problem is that to function properly and at a proper level, you have to expend more PP than the base cost. This means that lower level powers have level than valuable effects, and they are less than effective without further expenditure, correct? So the psionic is more likely to have to burn more power points per manifestation to be effective.

Everything is too expensive! :smallannoyed:



If what you want is a perfect system before it hits the table, then I hope you're prepared to be disappointed with every tabletop system ever created. Psionics is no exception.
Psionics disappoints me the most but doesn't get (seemingly) any trouble for it.


In TO you can get infinite Wishes at level 1, or chain-Gate solars. Is that Psionics' fault too?
No, that's the ceiling's fault. I am pointing this is present in Psionics as well.

[JoshuaZ]

Psionics disappoints me the most but doesn't get (seemingly) any trouble for it.

Really? Have you not noticed how many people won't use psionics because they think it is uber-broken without having actually used it.




No, that's the ceiling's fault. I am pointing this is present in Psionics as well.

So a major part of your argument against the system is a type of problem found throughout most 3.5 systems and which never comes in play. Is that accurate?

[Snowbluff]

Really? Have you not noticed how many people won't use psionics because they think it is uber-broken without having actually used it. Refer to number 4 on the OP. I've played with Psi and I have come to this conclusion. The rest of the trouble is fake and lame. Not my cup of tea.


So a major part of your argument against the system is a type of problem found throughout most 3.5 systems and which never comes in play. Is that accurate?
Yes, to the part people refer to when they usually call something overpowered. Like Schrodinger's Wizard. Most would be wrong. The issues that aren't universal (Pun Pun, for example) are the only ones that are really relevant here.

[Waspinator]

I have trouble seeing the lack of components as a problem since the requirement of components has almost never come up in games I've played.

[Psyren]

If they want to cast, they use components. Having a pouch also identifies a caster, and the SoH rule doesn't cover using Material Components.

Putting Eschew Materials aside, pouches can be concealed pretty easily; they're pouches. And every adventurer is going to have a pouch of some kind, e.g. a coin purse, so that's a poor way to identify them.

For spellcasting, the component has to be in hand anyway - they can take out the bit of spiderweb or what have you and simply hold it in their hands before the encounter. In fact, they could even hold multiple, nothing says that the material component for that particular spell has to be the only one in your hand.



I see. This is to balance against the lack of components? Where with Spellcraft you have to see it be cast, you can identify a power with during a save.

Identifying from a save exists for spells as well.



The problem is that to function properly and at a proper level, you have to expend more PP than the base cost. This means that lower level powers have level than valuable effects, and they are less than effective without further expenditure, correct? So the psionic is more likely to have to burn more power points per manifestation to be effective.

Now you're confusing me. Spending more PP is a good thing, it means they will have to be more careful so they can save PP for subsequent encounters. Less novas, more chances for the other members of the party to shine. Isn't that what you want?



Psionics disappoints me the most but doesn't get (seemingly) any trouble for it.

It's not perfect, but it's still more balanced than spellcasting, so it tends to be looked on more favorably. It has its problems to be sure.



No, that's the ceiling's fault. I am pointing this is present in Psionics as well.

So? TO is a problem in any system with enough options.

[eggynack]

If you actually want to get into the psion's power level, it has just about nothing to do with the fact that they're effectively always casting still silent spells with eschew components. If the psion required material, somatic and verbal components to cast spells, they'd still be in tier 2, and if wizards didn't, they'd still be in tier 1. The reason the psion is in tier 2 is because they're effectively a spontaneous caster. They get limited spells known in exchange for some nifty abilities. Just about nothing else about the psion has any impact on their power level. Sure, they can augment, but that's a bit of a trade off. In fact, when compared to a sorcerer, all of the things you mentioned are balanced out by a trade off. We all know how powerful psions are. If you have reason to think that they should be somewhere that isn't tier 2, go right ahead and say so. Otherwise, this argument is somewhat meaningless.

[Waspinator]

If you really need a way to incarcerate Psions safely, Flesh to Stone works for pretty much everybody. It's kind of the universal way to safely hold someone: it doesn't really matter what you are, you're stuck as a statue without outside help.

Also, stuff like the lack of components and ectoplasm stuff does serve an important purpose: creating a different thematic feel. If Psions didn't have stuff like that, they would basically just play like a Sorceror using a MP system. They need something to differentiate them.

[Psyren]

If you really need a way to incarcerate Psions safely, Flesh to Stone works for pretty much everybody. It's kind of the universal way to safely hold someone: it doesn't really matter what you are, you're stuck as a statue without outside help.

Warforged :smalltongue:

[Threadnaught]

Um... no? The Psion gets 36 powers at level 20 with access to all powers on the Psion/Wilder list, as well as the 10-11 powers on their discipline list. They are not limited to only the powers of their discipline, and can take powers of any discipline, provided they are not part of the special discipline lists?

Wilders only get 11 powers, and only from the Psion/Wilder list. How exactly is this more versatility?

Because this.


Discipline

Every psion must decide at 1st level which psionic discipline he will specialize in. Choosing a discipline provides a psion with access to the class skills associated with that discipline (see above), as well as the powers restricted to that discipline. However, choosing a discipline also means that the psion cannot learn powers that are restricted to other disciplines. He can’t even use such powers by employing psionic items.

This looks just like a Wizard's specialization to me. With more restrictions

[Piggy Knowles]

Because this.



This looks just like a Wizard's specialization to me. With more restrictions

The way that section is worded makes it seem a lot more restrictive than it really is. A psion's disciplines are actually much closer to a cleric's domains than a wizard's specialized schools.

[Ashtagon]

Because this.



This looks just like a Wizard's specialization to me. With more restrictions

Have a look at the discipline lists. No discipline has more than 3 powers at any given level; most have only 1-2 per level. Conceptually, it's closer to a cleric being denied any spell that is listed in a cleric domain he has not chosen. More than half the psionic powers are not in any discipline.

[Psyren]

Because this.



This looks just like a Wizard's specialization to me. With more restrictions

Your confusion is understandable but you're mistaken. Psions are actually less restricted in this regard than wizards are.

The key line you're misreading is "the psion cannot learn powers that are restricted to other disciplines." Every psionic power belongs to a discipline - however, each discipline only has a handful of restricted powers. In the XPH, these powers are listed starting on page 72, and they are also listed in the SRD here. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powerList.htm#psionDisciplinePowers) When you see a reference in a sourcebook to "discipline powers," it is specifically referring to these restricted powers.

Meanwhile, the remainder (and majority) of psion powers are unrestricted; these are commonly referred to as "general powers." This means that any psion, regardless of discipline, can learn them. This is very different from the wizard's approach of banning entire schools of magic - What psionics does instead is have a wide general pool common to all psions, while keeping smaller subgroups of (usually iconic or more potent) powers for each discipline that the other disciplines cannot normally learn.

For example, Empathy and Mindlink are both Telepathy powers. Mindlink is restricted to Telepaths (i.e. psions that have chosen the Telepathy discipline), but Empathy is open to all of them, and Wilders too. In addition to the page number and link I cited above, you can also tell this by the power's entry - Empathy says "psion/wilder 1", meaning it is a 1st-level telepathy power on the general psion/wilder list, while Mindlink's entry says "Telepath 1" meaning that only Telepaths can choose it freely.

The final concept to keep in mind is the Expanded Knowledge feat. This feat allows any manifester to learn any power from any list regardless of whether it is restricted or not. So a Kineticist could use that feat to learn Mindlink, even though that power is normally restricted to Telepaths.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Since this thread is also about how psionics is annoying...

I HATE that you only get bonus pp for high ability score for one of your manifesting classes. I get it, you share pp between classes, blah blah blah. It's still unfair and bs.

Power Points/Day
A war mind can manifest powers. His ability to manifest powers is limited by the power points he has available. His base daily allotment of power points is given on Table: The War Mind. In addition, he receives bonus power points per day if he has a high Wisdom score. His race may also provide bonus power points per day, as may certain feats and items. If a war mind has power points from a different class, those points are pooled together and usable to manifest powers from either class. Bonus power points from having a high ability score can be gained only for the character’s highest psionic class.

I've looked into making a Psy War / Warmind before, and every time, the outright mugging you suffer on bonus pp just pisses me off enough to not bother with it (well, that and 3/4 of all DMs I find ban psionics and the ones who allow it tend to get so many tier 1-2 PCs in their games a war mind would be too underpowered for me to enjoy it). I'd rather have the pools be separate and actually get the pp I deserve! Multiclassed spellcasters don't get screwed over like this, why do psionic classes?

[eggynack]

It's possible that the comparitive restrictiveness depends on the level. Any wizard who specializes can expect to lose about one fourth of their total spells from the lost schools. There's some sway on either side due to a general imbalance of spells per school, but I think it balances out alright. Specifically, most wizard keep conjuration and transmutation, and all wizards keep divination. I haven't checked, but I think that the former schools have a higher than average number of spells, and the latter has a lower than average number. The effect of universal spells is pretty negligible.

I won't do this for every level, because there's a lot of powers, but for now let's look at first and ninth level powers. At first level powers, there are 42 powers usable by all psions. There are 10 powers that are restricted. You can be expected to lose five sixths of the restricted powers, which is in this case 8.333... Out of a total of 52 powers, this represents about 15% of the potential powers lost, compared to 25% for wizards. At this level, you are thus ahead of the wizard by 10%. At ninth level, the number of powers is sharply reduced, but the number of specialist powers is pretty similar. Specifically, there are 7 general powers compared to 9 restricted powers. By this point, the powers you lose from this restricted access is actually greater than the number of general powers. The wizard still clocks in at an average of 25%. For a good midpoint, let's look at fifth level powers too. At that level, you have access to 12 general powers, compared to 13 restricted powers. You're expected to lose about 10.8 powers, which is again nearly half of your total powers. Notably, it appears that as the general powers decrease, the specific powers tend to increase. They slope down towards the end, but never lower than at first level.

Thus, I contend that the psionics system is less restrictive at low levels, and more restrictive at high levels. However, I'm not certain that this examination is reflective of real play. On the side of the wizard, there are a few perfectly viable options that obviate the need to specialize at all. These include elven generalist and domain wizard. On the other side of the equation, psions aren't nearly as effected by loss of access to a large amount of powers. Wizards are capable of learning every spell on their list, so they feel all 25% of their lost spells. By comparison, the psion has a limited list. At level 20 they know 36 powers. Thus, if they so desired, they could take every first level power they wanted, and still never hit a wall. Still, despite the broad availability of general psionic powers, the fact that you lose access to five sixths of the restricted powers, rather than one fourth of the whole list, means that psions tend to be restricted more on a purely lost spell to lost power basis.

[georgie_leech]

On the other hand, it means that advancement in any psionic class gives you more resources to work with in all existing psionic classes. The same can't be said for spellcasting. Outside of "advance spellcasting of X" Prestige classes, Classes that have their own spell progression don't give additional uses of existing spell slots (They do increase CL and so the spells auto-scale, but that's another issue :smallsigh:). It makes thematic sense to me; that psionic powers are suppossed to be generated via will or some other mental action, and thus any increase in mental "stamina" would improve your existing stamina.

[killem2]

Like any class, it all boils down to the player.

Unless they are purposely unleashing hell, its pretty rare at least my groups games where someone breaks the game in half.

I play a halfling conjurer who is on his way to master specialist then later into malconvoker.

I can "feel" just how far I could push combat into my favor and outshine everyone, but I don't act on it.
:)

[Rubik]

Since this thread is also about how psionics is annoying...

I HATE that you only get bonus pp for high ability score for one of your manifesting classes. I get it, you share pp between classes, blah blah blah. It's still unfair and bs.

Power Points/Day
A war mind can manifest powers. His ability to manifest powers is limited by the power points he has available. His base daily allotment of power points is given on Table: The War Mind. In addition, he receives bonus power points per day if he has a high Wisdom score. His race may also provide bonus power points per day, as may certain feats and items. If a war mind has power points from a different class, those points are pooled together and usable to manifest powers from either class. Bonus power points from having a high ability score can be gained only for the character’s highest psionic class.

I've looked into making a Psy War / Warmind before, and every time, the outright mugging you suffer on bonus pp just pisses me off enough to not bother with it (well, that and 3/4 of all DMs I find ban psionics and the ones who allow it tend to get so many tier 1-2 PCs in their games a war mind would be too underpowered for me to enjoy it). I'd rather have the pools be separate and actually get the pp I deserve! Multiclassed spellcasters don't get screwed over like this, why do psionic classes?Um... What? Should this be in blue? Either you're snarking and trying to make a point about the thread or I'm missing something (or possibly both), because I've never seen the bolded portion you quoted in my life. Where did it come from?

[Psyren]

Since this thread is also about how psionics is annoying...

I HATE that you only get bonus pp for high ability score for one of your manifesting classes. I get it, you share pp between classes, blah blah blah. It's still unfair and bs.

Power Points/Day
A war mind can manifest powers. His ability to manifest powers is limited by the power points he has available. His base daily allotment of power points is given on Table: The War Mind. In addition, he receives bonus power points per day if he has a high Wisdom score. His race may also provide bonus power points per day, as may certain feats and items. If a war mind has power points from a different class, those points are pooled together and usable to manifest powers from either class. Bonus power points from having a high ability score can be gained only for the character’s highest psionic class.

I've looked into making a Psy War / Warmind before, and every time, the outright mugging you suffer on bonus pp just pisses me off enough to not bother with it (well, that and 3/4 of all DMs I find ban psionics and the ones who allow it tend to get so many tier 1-2 PCs in their games a war mind would be too underpowered for me to enjoy it). I'd rather have the pools be separate and actually get the pp I deserve! Multiclassed spellcasters don't get screwed over like this, why do psionic classes?

XPH 17 contradicts this completely. It specifically gives the example of a Psion 5/Psywar 5 getting bonus PP from both classes, as well as counting both your Int and Wis modifiers in the calculation. At worst, your quote (from the War Mind entry) only applies if you take levels in War Mind; more likely it is simply a case of bad editing. Since XPH 17 is the portion of the book that specifically tells you how to calculate bonus PP, it is the primary source for that rule.

[Snowbluff]

Looking at the powers, I have come to the conclusion they function without augmentation. :smalltongue:

As far a PP goes, assuming 4 fights of ~3 rounds each, a 17th level psion should be able to manifest a full power most of the rounds.

Looking at this, 2 PP is about right for level 1, mirroring the base 2 slots for a Wizard.
250 at level 17 means you can cast your ninth level powers each round, before bonus PP.

I won't analyze this further. I would have to calculate the bonus PP at each power learned.

[StreamOfTheSky]

XPH 17 contradicts this completely. It specifically gives the example of a Psion 5/Psywar 5 getting bonus PP from both classes, as well as counting both your Int and Wis modifiers in the calculation. At worst, your quote (from the War Mind entry) only applies if you take levels in War Mind; more likely it is simply a case of bad editing. Since XPH 17 is the portion of the book that specifically tells you how to calculate bonus PP, it is the primary source for that rule.

Well, clearly it was an epidemic of "bad editing," then...


Psionic Fist can manifest powers. His ability to manifest powers is limited by the power points he has available. His base daily allotment of power points is given on Table: The Psionic Fist. In addition, he receives bonus power points per day if he has a high Wisdom score (see Table: Ability Modifiers and Bonus Power Points). His race may also provide bonus power points per day, as may certain feats and items. If a Psionic Fist has power points from a different class, those points are pooled together and usable to manifest powers from either class. Bonus power points from having a high ability score can be gained only for the character’s highest psionic class.

That and War Mind are the *only* PrC's in XPH that have their own power progression (rather tha advancing an existing class), and both seem to have this "mistake." I have no idea if this holds steady in CPsi or not...I've put a great deal of effort into forgetting that book exists.

It would be GREAT if what you say is true and this blurb from p. 17 negates what War Mind and Psionic Fist both say. Because again, getting robbed of PP is total bs. But specific trumps general, so I'm worried that may not be the case... Certainly I'd be wary of a DM seeing things that way.

[Psyren]

It would be GREAT if what you say is true and this blurb from p. 17 negates what War Mind and Psionic Fist both say. Because again, getting robbed of PP is total bs. But specific trumps general, so I'm worried that may not be the case... Certainly I'd be wary of a DM seeing things that way.

To answer your question - no, CPsi does not include this line (Zerth Cenobite being a PrC with its own PP progression.)

"Specific trumps general" doesn't actually apply here - both lines are equal in their specificity, because neither one specifies a circumstance under which they are true. So it's up to the DM to decide. Personally, I would then fall back to the primary source for bonus PP, which is the PP progression chart I referenced earlier, but it's really up to your DM at that point.

[olentu]

To answer your question - no, CPsi does not include this line (Zerth Cenobite being a PrC with its own PP progression.)

"Specific trumps general" doesn't actually apply here - both lines are equal in their specificity, because neither one specifies a circumstance under which they are true. So it's up to the DM to decide. Personally, I would then fall back to the primary source for bonus PP, which is the PP progression chart I referenced earlier, but it's really up to your DM at that point.

Er, what. It is part of a class feature and thus only applies to the character with the class feature.

[Psyren]

Er, what. It is part of a class feature and thus only applies to the character with the class feature.

Yes, I said that before. Read my previous post.

[olentu]

Yes, I said that before. Read my previous post.

Well I suppose that one could consider having a class feature to not be a circumstance. It seems like that would cause a great deal more trouble then is really necessary but whatever.

[Spuddles]

I've found that the less familiar one is with psionics, the less they like it. Snowbluff doesn't appear to be an exception.

[Snowbluff]

I've found that the less familiar one is with psionics, the less they like it. Snowbluff doesn't appear to be an exception.

Even if that was the case, this argument concerning PP gives credence to my complaints of unwanted system complications. Stupid Complete Psionics. :smallannoyed:

@V I agree.

[Waspinator]

Psionics seems to be the most misunderstood sub-system in 3.5.

[olentu]

Even if that was the case, this argument concerning PP gives credence to my complaints of unwanted system complications. Stupid Complete Psionics. :smallannoyed:

@V I agree.

Prestige classes having specific exceptions to general rules is hardly something unique to 3.5 psionics.

[ericp65]

Am I the only person alive who loves the Psionics system? My fondness for it is surpassed only by my extreme loathing of the implementation of Vancian magic/spellcasting.

[Morcleon]

Am I the only person alive who loves the Psionics system? My fondness for it is surpassed only by my extreme loathing of the implementation of Vancian magic/spellcasting.

I love psionics too. It's a wonderfully versatile and organic system. :smallbiggrin:

Although I don't share your hatred of Vancian casting. Not including TO and similar, it's just more mechanical. I tend to play most of my casters as scientists to some extent. :smalltongue:

[Divide by Zero]

Am I the only person alive who loves the Psionics system? My fondness for it is surpassed only by my extreme loathing of the implementation of Vancian magic/spellcasting.

The only thing I like about the standard casting classes is that they have so much more support, so you can make a wider variety of characters. If it weren't for ACFs and prestige classes, my preference would have to go psionics>spontaneous casters>most prepared casters>wizards. I don't think I've ever even built a wizard character, much less played one.

[gooddragon1]

Am I the only person alive who loves the Psionics system? My fondness for it is surpassed only by my extreme loathing of the implementation of Vancian magic/spellcasting.

Nope, I like psionics too. Just need lycanthromancer to educate the OP on why it isn't broken. Though I'll note a few things:

-Psionics has no method of removing a prismatic sphere.
-Psionics cannot create pun-pun or the cheater of mystra or the wish and the word (read: the really bad cheese).
-The official deal with spellcasters is: If you're "thinking with your spell slots" you're doing it wrong. A spellcaster can usually solve an encounter with a few well chosen spells. A psion must blast his way through it. Blasting is generally less effective than good spell use.
-Metapsionic feats require expenditure of psionic focus (you can't apply more than 1 per round). No metapsionic rods exist.
-If you're going to be a blaster it's better to play a mailman (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19868534/The_Mailman:_A_Direct_Damage_Sorcerer).
-Psions are better than sorcerer's at resource management but don't have any of the really cool stuff like: rope trick (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/ropeTrick.htm) and haste (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/haste.htm).
-It's an established rule of the TO community that psions are a tier lower than wizards. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=266559)
-Lots of the really good buffs a psion has apply to him only (which sucks because polymorph (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/polymorph.htm)-ing an ally into a 12 headed hydra is awesome (and broken maybe))
-Lots of the really good stuff a psion can do is discipline specific which means you have to pick what you get.
-Polymorph any object (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/polymorphAnyObject.htm) yourself into a dragon permanently to get lots of cool stuff for 2 spell slots is cool.
-Explosive runes (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/explosiveRunes.htm) and failed dispel magic (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/dispelMagic.htm)
(there are ways) if you want to go RAW and beat the psion at damage.
-Team solars (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=14937297#post14937297) are comprised of cool guys who "doesn't afraid of anything".

[Spuddles]

Wasn't the original pun-pun build a psion abusing metamorphic transfer? Pretty sure it was.

[Psyren]

Even if that was the case, this argument concerning PP gives credence to my complaints of unwanted system complications. Stupid Complete Psionics. :smallannoyed:

What olentu said, and the rule Stream quoted isn't even in CPsi. You're bellyaching for no reason now.

[gooddragon1]

Wasn't the original pun-pun build a psion abusing metamorphic transfer? Pretty sure it was.

Only if a sarrukh exists with less than 16 HD.

[Piggy Knowles]

Only if a sarrukh exists with less than 16 HD.

They have 14 HD. And the original Pun-Pun was a 12th level psion with Overchannel. It evolved over the years to have earlier and earlier entry methods, eventually culminating in the level 1 Pazazu version.

[navar100]

Psionics seems to be the most misunderstood sub-system in 3.5.

Tome of Battle would like a word with you. :smallbiggrin:

[Snowbluff]

Erudites are Tier 1. Tier 2 is still broken, just less so than T1 in capacity, not ability. StP means almost all of these are possible thanks to the magic of damaging the boundaries between spell lists.

The only thing that would be keeping the Psi from being as broken otherwise would be lack of support.


What olentu said, and the rule Stream quoted isn't even in CPsi. You're bellyaching for no reason now.

Excuse me, but the later source should clarify the rules on this. Has it done so?

[eggynack]

Erudites are Tier 1. Tier 2 is still broken, just less so than T1 in capacity, not ability. StP means almost all of these are possible thanks to the magic of damaging the boundaries between spell lists.


Seriously, what does it even mean for psionics to be broken in terms of power level? Psion is a class with above average power, but as has been noted a ludicrous number of times, balance is relative. I could play a psion in a party and easily not break the game at all. I'm not even speaking from an "I won't do these gamebreaking things" perspective. Outside of classes with fundamentally broken mechanics, like the truenamer, the term "broken" doesn't really have any meaning.

[Psyren]

Excuse me, but the later source should clarify the rules on this. Has it done so?

Actually, it shouldn't - WotC has a clear system for issuing errata, and using subsequent splatbooks to change rules is the worst way to go about it. It just leaves people confused if they only have one of the two volumes, particularly when one is OGC and the other is closed content.

More to the point however - you're singling out Psionics for something WotC doesn't do anywhere. For instance, the rule about losing access to a PrC for subsequently failing to meet its prerequisites shows up in Complete Arcane and Complete Warrior, then is never mentioned again.

[Morcleon]

-Psionics cannot create pun-pun or the cheater of mystra or the wish and the word (read: the really bad cheese).


They can get infinite standard actions, total invincibility, access to all spells and powers, their powers as (Su), and persisted temporal acceleration with no special effort. Also, check this out (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=177889).


-The official deal with spellcasters is: If you're "thinking with your spell slots" you're doing it wrong. A spellcaster can usually solve an encounter with a few well chosen spells. A psion must blast his way through it. Blasting is generally less effective than good spell use.


Psions can do the same. They have quite a few SoD/S.


-Metapsionic feats require expenditure of psionic focus (you can't apply more than 1 per round). No metapsionic rods exist.


You can have your psicrystal hold a psionic focus, and give it psionic meditation to auto refresh it for a total of 3 per round.


-Psions are better than sorcerer's at resource management but don't have any of the really cool stuff like: rope trick (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/ropeTrick.htm) and haste (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/haste.htm).


Rope trick exists in psychoportive shelter (CPsi). It's better too, letting you augment for more space.


-Lots of the really good stuff a psion can do is discipline specific which means you have to pick what you get.


Becomes irrelevant at high levels where you can buy powers via Psychic Chirurgery.


-Explosive runes (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/explosiveRunes.htm) and failed dispel magic (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/dispelMagic.htm)
(there are ways) if you want to go RAW and beat the psion at damage.[/QUOTE]

You can get infinite damage with Ardent 10. That tactic also requires large amounts of preparation time.


-Team solars (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=14937297#post14937297) are comprised of cool guys who "doesn't afraid of anything".


Psions get thrallherd. Chaining is better, and it lets you get more versatility of cohorts/followers by killing them and waiting 24 hours for another batch.

[Eldest]

Erudites are Tier 1. Tier 2 is still broken, just less so than T1 in capacity, not ability. StP means almost all of these are possible thanks to the magic of damaging the boundaries between spell lists.

So, on a tangent that will get around to the main point, what's your opinion on Tome of Battle?


Psions get thrallherd. Chaining is better, and it lets you get more versatility of cohorts/followers by killing them and waiting 24 hours for another batch.

What does Thrallherd have to do with Team Solar?

[Snowbluff]

Seriously, what does it even mean for psionics to be broken in terms of power level? Psion is a class with above average power, but as has been noted a ludicrous number of times, balance is relative. I could play a psion in a party and easily not break the game at all. I'm not even speaking from an "I won't do these gamebreaking things" perspective. Outside of classes with fundamentally broken mechanics, like the truenamer, the term "broken" doesn't really have any meaning.
Well, how about a new system that is primarily incapable of damaging the game without being underpowered as well. Like ToB.

I think claiming it as overpowered is not an issue. It's true, if not through virtue of itself, which you are claiming, but by my rhetoric alone. Psion is T2, and consider a system capable of birthing a T2 is overpowered.

Divine Mind is broken is much the way Soulborn is, in that is lacks the ability to function at a reasonable level in it's own system initially.


More to the point however - you're singling out Psionics for something WotC doesn't do anywhere. For instance, the rule about losing access to a PrC for subsequently failing to meet its prerequisites shows up in Complete Arcane and Complete Warrior, then is never mentioned again.

Page 86 Complete Arcane also changes Quicken Spell to be listed as a free action. Page 4 of the Spell Compendium validates this. It seems that fixing problems via splat is something that happens somewhere.

Re: Metamorhpic Transfer: What percentage of Psionic Classes can use Metamorphic Transfer? I know Egoists can, Ardents can, Erudite can, and Psychic Warriors can because Ardents can. It seems they all can with the Expanded Knowledge feat, but this represents a departure from the classes themselves, as is Metamorphic Transfer to a degree.

[Morcleon]

What does Thrallherd have to do with Team Solar?

It's a psionic tactic for a large number of people, versatility and power? I'm not quite sure what Team Solar is, though... >.<

[Snowbluff]

It's a psionic tactic for a large number of people, versatility and power? I'm not quite sure what Team Solar is, though... >.<

I think he linked it. It's pretty much a team made of Incantatrix level characters. Each one is occupying a body of a Solar, IIRC.

[Ernir]

I think claiming it as overpowered is not an issue. It's true, if not through virtue of itself, which you are claiming, but by my rhetoric alone. Psion is T2, and consider a system capable of birthing a T2 is overpowered.

A system "capable of birthing a T2"? Pretty much any of the 3.5 subsystems are capable of it. ToB is a few more crazy maneuvers from it. All it would take is someone suggesting that Shapechange is an appropriate maneuver for a Swordsage to have, and you'd have a T2-style power problem.

Wait, oops.

[Snowbluff]

A system "capable of birthing a T2"? Pretty much any of the 3.5 subsystems are capable of it. ToB is a few more crazy maneuvers from it. All it would take is someone suggesting that Shapechange is an appropriate maneuver for a Swordsage to have, and you'd have a T2-style power problem.

Wait, oops.

The problem with that would be that you would have to give that ability to the Swordsage after the fact. As-is, by the book and standards held within, Swordsage is effectively Tier 3.

Psionics is fine after you give it to a table and they make rules to have it fixed like any other system. This is true for all system, but that is not that discussion. I don't think I ever got the Component Psionics homebrew I requested, so I don't think that will ever be the discussion.

[Psyren]

Page 86 Complete Arcane also changes Quicken Spell to be listed as a free action. Page 4 of the Spell Compendium validates this. It seems that fixing problems via splat is something that happens somewhere.

Oh, I know it happens. That's why I said "shouldn't" rather than "doesn't."

They tried to use CPsi and MiC to create errata as well, and all it's caused are competing standards and continual bickering.



Divine Mind is broken is much the way Soulborn is, in that is lacks the ability to function at a reasonable level in it's own system initially.

Eh, Divine Mind is weak and the flavor is terrible, but it can still beat up a Soulborn and take its lunch money.

[eggynack]

That definition of overpowered is arbitrary though. If your level of balance in a game is between tiers 3 and 5, then sure psionics is overpowered. However, you could just as easily set your power line between tiers 1-3, or even 4-6. The term "overpowered" is utterly pointless in a vacuum. You say that "a system capable of birthing a T2 is overpowered," but why would that be true? Why not say, "Any system capable of birthing a tier 4 is underpowered,"? They're basically logically equivalent, if tier 3 is the central assumed balance point. Using that as a metric, arcane casting is an underpowered system because warmage exists, and divine casting is an underpowered system because the healer exists. In a competitive game, all issues of balance would be set with wizards as a base line with everything underneath being underpowered, and possibly TO options being considered overpowered. Basically, everything banned in the test of spite could be considered overpowered, or you could set your own ban list. In a cooperative game, you can set your own balance level so any given balance line is something you can only determine on a game by game basis. In a wizard, cleric, psion party, a fighter is underpowered. In a fighter, monk, paladin party, a psion is overpowered.

[navar100]

Erudites are Tier 1. Tier 2 is still broken, just less so than T1 in capacity, not ability. StP means almost all of these are possible thanks to the magic of damaging the boundaries between spell lists.

The only thing that would be keeping the Psi from being as broken otherwise would be lack of support.



Excuse me, but the later source should clarify the rules on this. Has it done so?

Tiers 1 & 2 classes are not "broken". They merely have great versatility of doing things. That's all it means to be Tier 1 or Tier 2. Any value judgements you bring are yours, not class placement.

[Snowbluff]

Oh, I know it happens. That's why I said "shouldn't" rather than "doesn't."

They tried to use CPsi and MiC to create errata as well, and all it's caused are competing standards and continual bickering.



Eh, Divine Mind is weak and the flavor is terrible, but it can still beat up a Soulborn and take its lunch money.Well, I am discussing the does here. I have plenty of shoulds, by you complain when I present them.

Soulborn is easy to beat up. That's why I pointed it out. At least DivineMind gets Wild Talent. If it was more interesting, you'd have a thread on Soulborn.:smalltongue:

[navar100]

That definition of overpowered is arbitrary though. If your level of balance in a game is between tiers 3 and 5, then sure psionics is overpowered. However, you could just as easily set your power line between tiers 1-3, or even 4-6. The term "overpowered" is utterly pointless in a vacuum. You say that "a system capable of birthing a T2 is overpowered," but why would that be true? Why not say, "Any system capable of birthing a tier 4 is underpowered,"? They're basically logically equivalent, if tier 3 is the central assumed balance point. Using that as a metric, arcane casting is an underpowered system because warmage exists, and divine casting is an underpowered system because the healer exists. In a competitive game, all issues of balance would be set with wizards as a base line with everything underneath being underpowered, and possibly TO options being considered overpowered. Basically, everything banned in the test of spite could be considered overpowered, or you could set your own ban list. In a cooperative game, you can set your own balance level so any given balance line is something you can only determine on a game by game basis. In a wizard, cleric, psion party, a fighter is underpowered. In a fighter, monk, paladin party, a psion is overpowered.

I harp on the Tier System a lot and am definitely not a follower of it, but thank you for using the Tier System in your arguments the way it was meant to be used - a gauge on power level for a particular game and not a value judgment as too often happens around here, such as calling Tier 2 "broken".

[Eldest]

It's a psionic tactic for a large number of people, versatility and power? I'm not quite sure what Team Solar is, though... >.<

It is in the quote you responded to. Would you mind answering how a PrC deticated to a slightly more powerful Leadership compares to Team Solar?


The problem with that would be that you would have to give that ability to the Swordsage after the fact. As-is, by the book and standards held within, Swordsage is effectively Tier 3.

Swordsage is T3. Erudite is T1. StP Erudite is T1. Arcane Swordsage is T2. Therefore, by your logic, Tome of Battle is overpowered.

I can't find any source for the StP Erudite other than this article. (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20070629a) Arcane swordsage is a suggestion in the book. Fun fact: neither of these two use their own subsystem: they use vancian casting. They are also both far more powerful than their native subsystem. Psionics is not overpowered, and their fluff is less or as ridiculous as, say, Hideous Laughter. Augmentation is a way of making low level spells count: that is not a bad thing. I do not think you realize exactly how well the autoscaling of vancian casting compares to the augmentation system of psionics. Keeping a psionic character captured just requires that you keep him unconscious or in an antimagic field, same as any caster. Psionics and magic being anything other than fully transparent is an optional rule. I do not see why you took offense at this rule and not, say, the generic spellcaster. I am confused by your reference to a T1 and T2 in XPH: I think there are two T2s, a T3, and a T5.

Final question: have you played a psionic character?

[Snowbluff]

I harp on the Tier System a lot and am definitely not a follower of it, but thank you for using the Tier System in your arguments the way it was meant to be used - a gauge on power level for a particular game and not a value judgment as too often happens around here, such as calling Tier 2 "broken".

I use the tier system as an example. It is inductive of the capability of ten represented systems, whether or not you agree with it.

[Renen]

So Snowbluff pretty much hates 1/2 the classes in the game?
Because if he thinks psionics (which range from t1-t2, not counting the lower ones) are OP, then ALL the other T1-2 classes are also OP. Which brings up to the question of why he is even playing a game that has SUCH severe balance issues?

[Snowbluff]

I've played a Wilder and a Psionic Warrior.

The problem with StP is that it pollutes psionics with the issues that arrive in another system. This compounding list of abilities provides the point of consternation. Arcane Swordsage is an incomplete suggestion, while the online articles are valid material.

The Arcane Swordsage adaptation even lacks any concrete rule, indicating preference on how it would operate. It can not be discussed RAW and pre-table, because we do not have any rules for it. Trust me, if it was a thing, I would have posted a thread on it.


So Snowbluff pretty much hates 1/2 the classes in the game?
Because if he thinks psionics (which range from t1-t2, not counting the lower ones) are OP, then ALL the other T1-2 classes are also OP. Which brings up to the question of why he is even playing a game that has SUCH severe balance issues?

Because imbalance is fun! It gives us so much to talk about. Just because I hate it doesn't mean I don't use it.

The real issue is how it operates before players get to in the mix. For some reason the people seem to think that psionics represents some sort of balance in this game. Or, that's what I've been gathering.

[Soranar]

There's an aspect to these forums that we often tend to forget:

theoretical play vs actual play

in theory, the batman wizard is the god of Dnd
in practice, spontaneous caster edges wizards due to the versatility of choosing your spells on the fly and most of the wizard's broken abilities never see actual play because most players don't like to break campaigns

in theory, summoning is an extremely powerful tool : giving you access to tailored meatshields for every occasion

in practice, most people stick to a handful of summons which they use all the time

with this in mind, the psionic character gets several advantages

astral construct may only be one power, but it almost equals all the summoning spells you can imagine in usefulness

since it's a "build your own summon" spell, you don't need to keep track of endless lists of creatures to summon, you just adapt your construct to the situation at hand

sure you only get 36 powers, but as with astral construct, most of these powers scale very well (through augmentation). This is not true of most spells, which explains why psionics tend to edge out sorcerers (though not by much)

basically: while wizard is better in theory, in practice a sorcerer or a psion is just as good and simpler to play. Since a Psion is slightly better than a sorcerer (IMO), you end up looking overpowered

[Eldest]

I've played a Wilder and a Psionic Warrior.

The problem with StP is that it pollutes psionics with the issues that arrive in another system. This compounding list of abilities provides the point of consternation. Arcane Swordsage is an incomplete suggestion, while the online articles are valid material.

The Arcane Swordsage adaptation even lacks any concrete rule, indicating preference on how it would operate. It can not be discussed RAW and pre-table, because we do not have any rules for it. Trust me, if it was a thing, I would have posted a thread on it.



Because imbalance is fun! It gives us so much to talk about. Just because I hate it doesn't mean I don't use it.

The real issue is how it operates before players get to in the mix. For some reason the people seem to think that psionics represents some sort of balance in this game. Or, that's what I've been gathering.

Alright, would you mind laying out a specific list of problems you have with Psionics, as well as what you consider overpowered? Tier 2 and above? Tier 4 and above?

[Snowbluff]

I've been over this. :smallsigh:

I like Tiers 3 and 4, and I tend to push my players to play there, just so they don't stomp on eachother. I admits it's rather lazy, but it's the most effective measure I've implemented to attempt some table balance. Subjectively, I like the variety it has while not chopping whole system (save for Tru- uh, that, I believe). Objectively, the most class features are represented here, in this range.

Re: AC and number of abilities, Batman.

I would say astral construct gets outstripped by the stronger summons at higher level, but it does cover a good number of abilities.

For reference, a Psion learns 36 powers, a sorcerer 43. The Psion has at least 5 first level powers, while the Sorcerer has 9 first level spells, so the actual numbers kind of balance out.

[Renen]

I've played a Wilder and a Psionic Warrior.

The problem with StP is that it pollutes psionics with the issues that arrive in another system. This compounding list of abilities provides the point of consternation. Arcane Swordsage is an incomplete suggestion, while the online articles are valid material.

The Arcane Swordsage adaptation even lacks any concrete rule, indicating preference on how it would operate. It can not be discussed RAW and pre-table, because we do not have any rules for it. Trust me, if it was a thing, I would have posted a thread on it.



Because imbalance is fun! It gives us so much to talk about. Just because I hate it doesn't mean I don't use it.

The real issue is how it operates before players get to in the mix. For some reason the people seem to think that psionics represents some sort of balance in this game. Or, that's what I've been gathering.

Only balanced tier is T3. Anything above is OP, anything below is UP. Psions represent the more balanced part of the OP section (T1-2). Thats what people mean. Psionics isnt most balanced thing out there, but its most (or atleast pretty high on the balance list) balanced of the "broken" casters.

[Snowbluff]

Only balanced tier is T3. Anything above is OP, anything below is UP. Psions represent the more balanced part of the OP section (T1-2). Thats what people mean. Psionics isnt most balanced thing out there, but its most (or atleast pretty high on the balance list) balanced of the "broken" casters.

Okay, I can dig this.

Playing a Wilder, I sucked at power selection (that sort of thing is one of my weaknesses as a player), but I found it was difficult to stop me from doing anything without taking special measures.

I really like Psychic Warrior, honestly. Tashalatora Psiwarrior provides, for me, what is the definite monk archetype. The use of the Wisdom stat, the background, and abilities work pretty well together. Psiwarrior provides the best use of Augmentation in my opinion, with how your self-buffing action economy scaling up with ML. The psionics weren't too involving, and could easily be dismissed as mind-over-body style training. It doesn't feel like just another caster, which is another reason why I like seeing it in my games. :smallsmile:

[eggynack]

I've been over this. :smallsigh:

I like Tiers 3 and 4, and I tend to push my players to play there, just so they don't stomp on eachother. I admits it's rather lazy, but it's the most effective measure I've implemented to attempt some table balance. Subjectively, I like the variety it has while not chopping whole system (save for Tru- uh, that, I believe). Objectively, the most class features are represented here, in this range.


Good for you. It is entirely within your prerogative to construct balance by stripping away swathes of the tier system. In a game with all tier 3's and 4's, a psion would be overpowered, but probably alright. In a game with all 4's and 5's, a psion would obsolete a number of the other party members. It's absurd, however, to assume that every game takes place within that band of gameplay. It is equally within my prerogative to create a game of nothing but tier one's, and in that game the psion is a bit underpowered. You're using the way you do play as a way to extrapolate the way the game should play.



There's an aspect to these forums that we often tend to forget:

theoretical play vs actual play

in theory, the batman wizard is the god of Dnd
in practice, spontaneous caster edges wizards due to the versatility of choosing your spells on the fly and most of the wizard's broken abilities never see actual play because most players don't like to break campaigns

in theory, summoning is an extremely powerful tool : giving you access to tailored meatshields for every occasion

in practice, most people stick to a handful of summons which they use all the time

with this in mind, the psionic character gets several advantages

astral construct may only be one power, but it almost equals all the summoning spells you can imagine in usefulness

since it's a "build your own summon" spell, you don't need to keep track of endless lists of creatures to summon, you just adapt your construct to the situation at hand

sure you only get 36 powers, but as with astral construct, most of these powers scale very well (through augmentation). This is not true of most spells, which explains why psionics tend to edge out sorcerers (though not by much)

basically: while wizard is better in theory, in practice a sorcerer or a psion is just as good and simpler to play. Since a Psion is slightly better than a sorcerer (IMO), you end up looking overpowered

I disagree with this quite a bit. Even if the wizard doesn't keep a spell list for different situations, the limitation on spells known to less than total spell slots means that a sorcerer is going to have less variety in their spells than even a practically built wizard. In addition, while some players may not track all of their potential summons, there are some that certainly do. The variety is useful, even if you don't use it. Especially because using a different summon for a different situation has no in game cost, unless the second summon is worse in that situation. Like Snowbluff above, you've taken your experiences with dungeons and dragons and extrapolated them to be indicative of the game as a whole. There are people who do nothing but shoot fireballs, and it's possible that they get more out of the sorcerer. However, to assume that a wizard who thinks through their actions a lot is theoretical, and one who doesn't is practical, is incorrect. A wizard who has a good variety of spells that they cast often, along with some situational spells in their spell book that they can wait till the next day to cast, and maybe a few spells that work better in a town than in a dungeon, is not something that only exists in our collective imagination.

[Eldest]

Only balanced tier is T3. Anything above is OP, anything below is UP. Psions represent the more balanced part of the OP section (T1-2). Thats what people mean. Psionics isnt most balanced thing out there, but its most (or atleast pretty high on the balance list) balanced of the "broken" casters.

The tier three being the only balanced tier is your opinion. The tier system goes out of it's way to say none of the tiers are the best.

Snowbluff, your issues seem to be this:

1. Psionics has no components, and no verbal or somatic components.
You seem to ignore stuff such as quintiessense. There are ways to disable psionic people, and people should be able to notice that that guy over there is concentrating really hard on something.
2. Augmentation.
You have yet to state a good reason this is a problem.
3. You take issue with the optional rule to treat psionics and magic differently.
Don't know what to say here, really.
4. Few people understand psionics.
And that's a problem.
5. The crystal and ectoplasm theme.
Tell me, with a straight face, that Hidious Laughter's fluff works in a serious campaign. I'm waiting.
6. You dislike that the separate subsystem has a different name for it's effects from the vancian casting subsystem.
They are seperate subsystems. Many power's effects mimic spells, that's true. But many more do not, and more importantly, the mechanics are quite diffferent.
7. Spell to Power Erudite. Which is a legitimate problem, since it is one of the most broken class variants in the game. Like Arcane Swordsage. Arcane Swordsage doesn't ruin ToB, StP shouldn't ruin psionics.
Like I said, this is a good complaint. It's just a silly one to judge the entire psionics system by, seeing as StP doesn't actually use that system. It uses a weird hybrid.
8. Complete Psi. You dislike the book. Ya need to define why, by the way.
You need to clairify what you mean by bad editing.
9. You dislike that lower-level powers can still be useful, and can in fact be more useful than higher-level effects.
Glibness. Haste. Silent Image. Mountain Hammer. More useful than, say, Statue.
10. Ardent ML based learning.
I believe this is a editing error: if not, it's still playable.
11. Divine Mind doesn't work.
Neither does healer or CW Samurai.

Something I did not see on my first read through:

Well, if a system has it's primary constituents in the operating in the T1-2 range, giving more gamebreaking opportunity, it is what I would call overpowered.

Vancian casting's main casters, the primary constituents, are all T1, save for the sorcerer, which is T2. So vancian casting is OP. It is, in fact, more overpowered by the fact that there are more high-tier classes in vancian casting. Finally, Arcane Swordsage is about as well defined and thought out as the StP Erudite. So if the StP is available for discussion, so is the Arcane Swordsage.

[olentu]

Excuse me, but the later source should clarify the rules on this. Has it done so?

If you really require a later source to explicitly tell you that specific overrides general there is the rules compendium.

[Snowbluff]

Something I did not see on my first read through:


Vancian casting's main casters, the primary constituents, are all T1, save for the sorcerer, which is T2. So vancian casting is OP. It is, in fact, more overpowered by the fact that there are more high-tier classes in vancian casting. If we are counting numbers, it seems there are at least 3 Vancians in T3, where as I only spot... 1 psionic. The loveable Psychic Warrior. Vancian is more OP and more balanced.


Finally, Arcane Swordsage is about as well defined and thought out as the StP Erudite. So if the StP is available for discussion, so is the Arcane Swordsage.
No. There are 0 concrete rules in the few sentences of a suggested adaptation section concerning Arcane Swordsage. The StP gives values to each new "power" from the spells, adds skills necessary for the variant's rules, and provides rules and example for the differences between ML and CL.

Arcane swardsage tells you to give no armor proficiency, change HD, but nothing else is concrete. It uses the words "prefer" to refer to developing the variant and "In general" when referring what spell types it would receive. Due to this wording, it requires a table to function. This discussion is pre-table.

[Eldest]

If we are counting numbers, it seems there are at least 3 Vancians in T3, where as I only spot... 1 psionic. The loveable Psychic Warrior. Vancian is more OP and more balanced.

Yes, there are more T1 classes from the Vancian subsystem. There are more T2s, T3s, and T4s. There's more of the Vancian subsystem, period.



No. There are 0 concrete rules in the few sentences of a suggested adaptation section concerning Arcane Swordsage. The StP gives values to each new "power" from the spells, adds skills necessary for the variant's rules, and provides rules and example for the differences between ML and CL.

Arcane swordsage tells you to give no armor proficiency, change HD, but nothing else is concrete. It uses the words "prefer" to refer to developing the variant and "In general" when referring what spell types it would receive. Due to this wording, it requires a table to function. This discussion is pre-table.

Look, the Arcane Swordsage is badly defined. However, it is a part of that book. You are judging the entire subsystem based on one variant of one class, that in your experience gets more play than anything else. Well, I'm stating that yes, it's an awful class, but one awful class does not a ruined subsystem make, same with the Arcane Swordsage and ToB. In my experience, nobody uses either. Ever. Heck, they avoid the Erudite. Psion, Psychic Rogue, and the PsyWar get play.

Now, are you going to debate or concede any of the other points?

[Snowbluff]

Yes, there are more T1 classes from the Vancian subsystem. There are more T2s, T3s, and T4s. There's more of the Vancian subsystem, period.
Well, if that's the case, then the numbers of each class in a tier is not a true measure of the power of a system, but the presence.


Look, the Arcane Swordsage is badly defined. However, it is a part of that book. You are judging the entire subsystem based on one variant of one class, that in your experience gets more play than anything else. Well, I'm stating that yes, it's an awful class, but one awful class does not a ruined subsystem make, same with the Arcane Swordsage and ToB. In my experience, nobody uses either. Ever. Heck, they avoid the Erudite. Psion, Psychic Rogue, and the PsyWar get play.

Now, are you going to debate or concede any of the other points?

Yeah, give me some time. Posting off of an ipod. Screen is too tiny to edit properly.

I think augmentation is bad though, and the whole system is redundant. We have enough casters, and the poor implentation of augmentation (Read: Energy Missile), means it's just another caster. Classes like Beguiler serve to limit the power of the Vancian while giving them some other tricks to work with. Psion was essentially a sorcerer/wizard hybrid and rehash with baked in MM.

Concentration is a Class Skill for Psions. The DCs for hiding signs are fixed, and you already have the points to avoid other issues that are shared with Vancian Casters. Your concentration checks succeed half of the time with ranks and moderate Con, and the ranks scale faster than the DCs.

Psychic Warrior pretty much sticks to a lot of powers that function better with reasonable augmentation, has good fluff, and is much less likely to break the system. The list is focused, since it is not a full caster, which is great. On the other hand, you can still break the system if you want to. I like the 2 ACFs (The weapon and Mantles). Pretty much when you look at the difference between Psion and Psychic Warrior, that's where I start to dislike it.

[eggynack]

I'm just really not sure what you're saying that's so revolutionary. Your logic is,
1: I don't like things above tier 3
2: Psionic classes are often above tier 3
Q.E.D: I don't like psionics.
There's really nothing that you've said at any point that indicates that the psionic classes are any less or more powerful than I think they are. I know that psions are tier 2, and that stp erudites are tier 1. You've really never told us what the problem with that is. The issue is that there isn't an issue. I can play a psychic warrior, and have a balanced game, and I can play an erudite and have a balanced game. Your logic effectively lacks a premise, which is that things above tier 3 are imbalanced. Moreover, that premise is demonstrably false. We can talk about piddly things that you dislike about psionics until the sun sets in the east, but that won't make your claim that psionics is imbalanced any more true.

[Snowbluff]

Moreover, that premise is demonstrably false. We can talk about piddly things that you dislike about psionics until the sun sets in the east, but that won't make your claim that psionics is imbalanced any more true.

I am talking mechanically. I can play a truenamer and have a balanced game, by the same logic, but we are reading rules. The goal is the acceptance that the Psionics are not an inherently "balanced" system, due to the mechanics and powers at work. We know that there are powers that break games (Tier List definition of the higher tiers. Breaking games). We know that psionics has its tricks that can break games. Is there still a question that system can break the game?

[Eldest]

Well, if that's the case, then the numbers of each class in a tier is not a true measure of the power of a system, but the presence.

What? No, the proportion of how many classes are in each tier would give a decent description of the power of that subsytem.


Yeah, give me some time. Posting off of an ipod. Screen is too tiny to edit properly.

No rush.


I think augmentation is bad though, and the whole system is redundant. We have enough casters, and the poor implentation of augmentation (Read: Energy Missile), means it's just another caster. Classes like Beguiler serve to limit the power of the Vancian while giving them some other tricks to work with. Psion was essentially a sorcerer/wizard hybrid and rehash with baked in MM.

Concentration is a Class Skill for Psions. The DCs for hiding signs are fixed, and you already have the points to avoid other issues that are shared with Vancian Casters. Your concentration checks succeed half of the time with ranks and moderate Con, and the ranks scale faster than the DCs.

Psychic Warrior pretty much sticks to a lot of powers that function better with reasonable augmentation, has good fluff, and is much less likely to break the system. The list is focused, since it is not a full caster, which is great. On the other hand, you can still break the system if you want to. I like the 2 ACFs (The weapon and Mantles). Pretty much when you look at the difference between Psion and Psychic Warrior, that's where I start to dislike it.

We have three subsystems for true casters: shadowcasting, vancian magic, and psionics. Shadowcasting is... mediocre. Vancian casting I'm sure you know. Psionics is the other casting method. More variety is a good thing. Heck, we should have less vancian casting and more use of the other subsystems. A psion, mechanically, is a sorcerer that is designed for spontaneous casting and specialization, as opposed to added on as an afterthought, and based off intelligence. And augmentation is not metamagic. Augmentation is scaling. You know how Fireball does your CL in d6s in damage, in a 30 foot area? Well, Energy Missile does that, except it does 3d6, in the same general fashion, but with no friendly fire and can max out at 5 people hit. Also, it's got less area. You have to pay to have a power at full, and you can't augment a power past your ML, so you can't beat out the fireball's damage. The actual metapsionic abilities are much better balanced than metamagic.

I am well aware you can suppress the signs of manifesting a power. I know it's easy. I am not sure why you think that being able to not visibly cast something is a bad idea.

So... you dislike the Psion?

Edit:

I am talking mechanically. I can play a truenamer and have a balanced game, by the same logic, but we are reading rules. The goal is the acceptance that the Psionics are not an inherently "balanced" system, due to the mechanics and powers at work. We know that there are powers that break games (Tier List definition of the higher tiers. Breaking games). We know that psionics has its tricks that can break games. Is there still a question that system can break the game?

Iron Heart Surge. The existance of things that can be broken is a given throughout the entire system of D&D 3.5. Nobody has claimed that Psionics does not have things that can be broken. However, that does not preclude it from overall being a well thought out and implemented system that contains less broken items than vancian casting.

[gooddragon1]

Wow, that link reminded me of a lot of the psi combos. The only 1 I remembered was bestow power affinity field fission.

However, psionics is very blasty which is much easier to regulate. With illusions or spell turning for example.

Lycanthromancer would be better at explaining why it isn't that bad but here's a link about some stuff:
Myth: The XPH is overpowered (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/18833134/Myth:_The_XPH_is_overpowered?pg=1)

[eggynack]

I am talking mechanically. I can play a truenamer and have a balanced game, by the same logic, but we are reading rules. The goal is the acceptance that the Psionics are not an inherently "balanced" system, due to the mechanics and powers at work. We know that there are powers that break games (Tier List definition of the higher tiers. Breaking games). We know that psionics has its tricks that can break games. Is there still a question that system can break the game?
Being able to break the game doesn't mean that a class is imbalanced. If every class in a game is able to break the game in various ways, then the game is balanced. An all truenamer game would be balanced, so long as the players all had the same optimization level. The psionics system isn't imbalanced, because the idea of a system being imbalanced is meaningless, and the psionic classes aren't imbalanced because balance is based on the surrounding characters. Maybe you like a balance point where characters can't break the game, but that's not true of everyone. Wizards are perfectly balanced with wizards, and a DM only has to take the class' abilities into account to have a functioning game.

[Snowbluff]

What? No, the proportion of how many classes are in each tier would give a decent description of the power of that subsytem.[QUOTE]

augmentation is not metamagic. Augmentation is scaling. You know how Fireball does your CL in d6s in damage, in a 30 foot area? Well, Energy Missile does that, except it does 3d6, in the same general fashion, but with no friendly fire and can max out at 5 people hit. I disagree, at least partly. It is scaling, but it also acts as MM. For example, compression comes bundled with Quicken by spending extra power points. These are the sort of effects I refer to when I say they come with MM.

Not all augmentation is bad, it's just not handled elegantly. Compression is actually one of the good examples. The "add PP for d6" examples would be the worst. Why would they not scale with level?


I am well aware you can suppress the signs of manifesting a power. I know it's easy. I am not sure why you think that being able to not visibly cast something is a bad idea.Well it's not just visible signs concentration covers. It also covers almost every circumstance a psion can cast under. Besides, as powerful as caster are, do they need a way to hide their spells with nothing other than a skill they invest in anyway? This would affect practical play.


So... you dislike the Psion? And Erudite, Divine Mind, and Ardent.

Edit:



Iron Heart Surge. The existance of things that can be broken is a given throughout the entire system of D&D 3.5. Nobody has claimed that Psionics does not have things that can be broken. However, that does not preclude it from overall being a well thought out and implemented system that contains less broken items than vancian casting.
Iron Heart Surge? What is a condition? (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm)
What's a spell? (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/glossary&term=Glossary_dnd_spell&alpha=S)
What is an effect? I don't know, it's an undefined term. Needs to be figured out at a table.

The 'less broken things' is simply a result of lack of support. They Erudite may still have all of the spells, if he wants, he just can't be an Incantatar. Mechanically, the system is ripe for abuse.

So, psionics can be broken. I must now return to my homeland. :smallsmile:

[gooddragon1]

So, psionics can be broken. I must now return to my homeland. :smallsmile:

Psionics can be broken, so can magic. People play wizards and don't break games, is there any reason they couldn't play a psion too?

Erudite is dragon magazine material.

[Snowbluff]

Erudite is dragon magazine material.

It's free, bro. Technically, it's a variant. (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/iw/20060406b)

People can play stuff an breaks games. The point is psionics is not an exception. It's obviously not an issue to a good table, but we are looking at the books (material).

[Waspinator]

Wait a second, there are people who actually consider Arcane Swordsages a finished idea? They're a vague idea described in half of a paragraph!

[olentu]

It's free, bro. Technically, it's a variant. (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/iw/20060406b)

People can play stuff an breaks games. The point is psionics is not an exception. It's obviously not an issue to a good table, but we are looking at the books (material).

That's all. That psionics can do things that some may consider broken. Seems like a lot of trouble to go through for something that was rather obvious.

[Snowbluff]

That's all. That psionics can do things that some may consider broken. Seems like a lot of trouble to go through for something that was rather obvious.

Without people like me, how would bureaucracies keep people from getting things done?

[Eldest]

So... the entire point of this was to point out that psionics can be broken?
Broken/=overpowered.
Broken/=annoying.
This thread, for you, seems to be about two things: psionics can be broken. This is pretty close to universally acknowledged. People have broken the Samurai. Shneekey (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125885). Everything in D&D 3.5 can be broken.

The second part is that you do not like Psionics, save for the Psywar and Psyrogue. And Lurk, I guess. Well, that's your choice. It can account for the annoying thing. But it's not overpowered.

And in answer to your question, the powers do not autoscale with level because that's the design. That is one of the core reasons how they diferentiate manifesting and spellcasting. You were annoyed that psionics isn't different enough, and the fact that it doesn't autoscale (which is one of the key differences) annoys you. The augments annoy you, another key difference. The fact that they can hide their signs of casting annoys you. Seems like every difference between manifesting and spellcasting annoys you.

[Psyren]

People can play stuff an breaks games. The point is psionics is not an exception.

That point is no point at all. Nobody ever said it wasn't breakable.

[Renen]

The tier three being the only balanced tier is your opinion. The tier system goes out of it's way to say none of the tiers are the best.

Snowbluff, your issues seem to be this:

1. Psionics has no components, and no verbal or somatic components.
You seem to ignore stuff such as quintiessense. There are ways to disable psionic people, and people should be able to notice that that guy over there is concentrating really hard on something.
2. Augmentation.
You have yet to state a good reason this is a problem.
3. You take issue with the optional rule to treat psionics and magic differently.
Don't know what to say here, really.
4. Few people understand psionics.
And that's a problem.
5. The crystal and ectoplasm theme.
Tell me, with a straight face, that Hidious Laughter's fluff works in a serious campaign. I'm waiting.
6. You dislike that the separate subsystem has a different name for it's effects from the vancian casting subsystem.
They are seperate subsystems. Many power's effects mimic spells, that's true. But many more do not, and more importantly, the mechanics are quite diffferent.
7. Spell to Power Erudite. Which is a legitimate problem, since it is one of the most broken class variants in the game. Like Arcane Swordsage. Arcane Swordsage doesn't ruin ToB, StP shouldn't ruin psionics.
Like I said, this is a good complaint. It's just a silly one to judge the entire psionics system by, seeing as StP doesn't actually use that system. It uses a weird hybrid.
8. Complete Psi. You dislike the book. Ya need to define why, by the way.
You need to clairify what you mean by bad editing.
9. You dislike that lower-level powers can still be useful, and can in fact be more useful than higher-level effects.
Glibness. Haste. Silent Image. Mountain Hammer. More useful than, say, Statue.
10. Ardent ML based learning.
I believe this is a editing error: if not, it's still playable.
11. Divine Mind doesn't work.
Neither does healer or CW Samurai.

Something I did not see on my first read through:


Vancian casting's main casters, the primary constituents, are all T1, save for the sorcerer, which is T2. So vancian casting is OP. It is, in fact, more overpowered by the fact that there are more high-tier classes in vancian casting. Finally, Arcane Swordsage is about as well defined and thought out as the StP Erudite. So if the StP is available for discussion, so is the Arcane Swordsage.

Erm... I'm not saying t3 is only balanced one. I'm using it as a middle of the stick.

The point of this thread seems to be complaining about a strong system, while ignoring the fact that all other stuff is either way more broken, or is so badly made its inviable. I think this needs a lock, as we are just going back and forth between people who say psionics are not broken (or atleast 2/3 of account classes in the game are broken) and people who say psionics ARE broken, while disregarding said 2/3 other classes

[Eldest]

Only balanced tier is T3. Anything above is OP, anything below is UP.

That was what I was responding to. I am glad you clarified your opinion.

[JusticeZero]

..most of the wizard's broken abilities never see actual play because most players don't like to break campaignsAre you seriously trying to claim that psions are overpowered because people who play wizards nobly refuse to use their character to their full potential, but some mysterious quality about having the word "Psion" on top of their character sheet turns the exact same player into a powergaming munchkin? This is comedy gold.

sure you only get 36 powers, but as with astral construct, most of these powers scale very well (through augmentation).As opposed to cleric/druid/wizard spells, which also scale very well... WITHOUT augmentation. That argument has already been soundly destroyed. Are you going to start a thread next about how ridiculously OP the Rogue is?

[JusticeZero]

If we are counting numbers, it seems there are at least 3 Vancians in T3, where as I only spot... 1 psionic. The loveable Psychic Warrior. Vancian is more OP and more balanced. So.. "because banana"? The power of a Bard is unaffected by the power of a Wizard. They are both arcane casters. but they are completely different classes and the balance of one has zero effect on the balance of the other. You're well within your rights to ban wizards, for instance, and unless you are banning more than the class "Wizard", you are not nerfing the Bard in the least.

[Waspinator]

It's possible to break the game by becoming a Diplomancer. Obviously we should ban players from talking to people.

[Aquillion]

Ooooh, this sounds like fun.

Clerics are overpowered; therefore, Paladins, who use cleric spells, are also overpowered.

Paladins are overpowered; therefore, fighters, who are likewise a full BAB class, are overpowered.

Fighters are overpowered; therefore, CW Samurai are overpowered.

Wizards are overpowered; therefore, Commoners, who have the same BAB and skill points, are overpowered.

Artificers are overpowered and use magic items; therefore, an Expert who uses magic items is overpowered.

Druids are overpowered and can turn into mice; therefore, mice are overpowered.

STP Erudite is overpowered; therefore, psionics are overpowered.

All of these statements are equally ridiculous. The thing that breaks the STP Erudite is not psionics, it's his specific ability to learn any spell, which is unique to him. Claiming that that proves psionics as a whole is broken is as ridiculous as claiming that that proves that commoners are broken because they share the same BAB.