Deflective armour feat

[justiceforall]

This feat amuses the hell out of me, but the GM has a blanket ban on psionics because they aren't DnD. However, as I noted that Deflective Armour doesn't actually require any psionic powers/etc to use, I figured he might let this one past.

I've determined I could get psionic focus by taking the Wild Talent feat (also without tripping his anti-psionic bias since I don't get any powers or such out of it). My question to the playground is, is there any way for a non-psionic character to pick up a single power point to allow psionic focus for a human that could never take any psionic class levels (also assume soulknife is out)?

[Xerlith]

What do you mean by "Psionics are not DnD"? :smallconfused:

And you answered yourself. To gain the ability to become psionically focused you need a power point reserve. Easiest way for that is either playing a psionic race or taking the Wild Talent feat.

[Hazrond]

What do you mean by "Psionics are not DnD"? :smallconfused:

I may be wrong but werent the original psionics by gygax himself :smallconfused: how could they NOT be D&D

[erok0809]

I would guess psionics "aren't D&D" because they don't fit in a typical high fantasy setting, like LotR. I don't agree with your DM, since I view psionics as basically just refluffed magic anyway, and magic is perfectly fine in that type of setting, but that's just my opinion.

[Hazrond]

I would guess psionics "aren't D&D" because they don't fit in a typical high fantasy setting, like LotR. I don't agree with your DM, since I view psionics as basically just refluffed magic anyway, and magic is perfectly fine in that type of setting, but that's just my opinion.

You know what i never understood? people claiming psionics worked in a antimagic field:smallconfused:

[Jowgen]

I vaguely recall hearing of a way to do this (possibly it was by using some item). I'm well aware this isn't of any real help, but I thought I'd post something focused on the question before this thread turned into a pro/con Psionic's debate :smalltongue: EDIT: Called it

[JusticeZero]

It gets worse when those people ban the Aegis and Soulknife too.
I actually banned all of the Core spellcasting lists in favor of DSP Psionics, for balance reasons. Mostly works great.

[heavyfuel]

You know what i never understood? people claiming psionics worked in a antimagic field:smallconfused:

It really depends of how psionic-magic transparent the world you're playing is. Some people like full transparency and some like the "recommended" transparency from the SRD. In either case, Psionics don't work inside an AMF.

But I've played at tables that had zero transparency. Psionics were psionics. Magic was magic. At this table, psionics worked inside an AMF, and spells inside a NPF. Personally I didn't like it, but these kinds of things are out there.

[Hazrond]

But I've played at tables that had zero transparency. Psionics were psionics. Magic was magic. At this table, psionics worked inside an AMF, and spells inside a NPF. Personally I didn't like it, but these kinds of things are out there.

That doesnt change that according to the SRD psionics are a spell-like ability and therefore subject to antimagic, thats pretty blatant RAW right there :smallconfused:

[sideswipe]

play synad, you get i think 3pp extra at level 1. so you have 3pp to spend. and can be psionically focused


to the psionics not working in the anti magic field -

magic and psionics have 2 different interpretations. one is that psionics are different then magic, spell resistance does not stop psionics and power resistance does not stop spells. also that anything that effects spells or powers does not effect the other.
the other interpretation is that magic and psionics are just the same thing different source. so they are transparent and they effect each other as if they were the same thing, spell or power.

the second way is commonly played. the first method is not really played but can be as they are both alternate rules in the same book.

the first way means that anything that effects spells does not effect psionics. AT ALL! so a psion walks into an anti magic field, yawns, and casts powers.
using this method means you need an anti psionics field as well.

edit - to the above post, the SRD is not infallible. and it assumes that people play with magic psionics transparency as it is the most logical and best way to play it.

[heavyfuel]

That doesnt change that according to the SRD psionics are a spell-like ability and therefore subject to antimagic, thats pretty blatant RAW right there :smallconfused:

It says that? Where?

The only mention of this is in the Psionic Monsters entry that says:




Any creature with psionic powers has the psionic subtype. A psionic creature can be born with the subtype or can gain the subtype during its life.

A creature meeting any one of the following criteria has the psionic subtype:

[...]

Creatures that have spell-like abilities described as “psionics.”


So the Mindflayer and his Psionic (Sp) ability is a Psionic Creature, and his psionics, being (Sp), don't work in an AMF. But unless there's a place saying that all psionic is an (Sp), then they should work in an AMF if there's no transparency.

[Hazrond]

It says that? Where?

The only mention of this is in the Psionic Monsters entry that says:



So the Mindflayer and his Psionic (Sp) ability is a Psionic Creature, and his psionics, being (Sp), don't work in an AMF. But unless there's a place saying that all psionic is an (Sp), then they should work in an AMF if there's no transparency.


Psionics (Sp) (http://dndsrd.net/monsterTypes.html): These are spell-like abilities that a creature generates with the power of its mind. Psionic abilities are usually usable at will.
so yeah, thats a thing :smalltongue:

Edit: Link fixed

[heavyfuel]

so yeah, thats a thing :smalltongue:

Edit: derped the link, please stand by for fixing

I think that by a strict RAW reading, Psionic Powers are different from Psionics described there. By RAW, two things are the same if they have the same name. There's nothing in the Psion's SRD with the name "Psionics", so they can't be considered one and the same (they can, but not by RAW)

[JusticeZero]

The usual default interpretation is that psionics is no more different from arcane magic than divine magic is, as far as the physics is concerned.

[Forrestfire]

I think that by a strict RAW reading, Psionic Powers are different from Psionics described there. By RAW, two things are the same if they have the same name. There's nothing in the Psion's SRD with the name "Psionics", so they can't be considered one and the same (they can, but not by RAW)

While that is correct, other parts of the srd state that "The manifestation of powers by a psionic character is considered a psi-like ability" (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicPowersOverview.htm) and that "[psi-like abilities] are psionic and work just like powers or spells." (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/monsters/overview.htm)

[Vhaidara]

so yeah, thats a thing :smalltongue:

Edit: Link fixed

That's psionics in a campaign that doesn't use the actual rules for psionics. Since those psionics are actually refluffed SLAs. If you look in the EPH, I believe that every MM creature with psionics is given a psionic alternate, in which its psionics are replaced with psi-like abilities.

[justiceforall]

And in answer to my actual question, rather than disagreeing remotely with my GM about the fluff interpretations of psionics which is never going to get anywhere? Psionics don't fit his idea of DnD, can't use them in his game, end of story.


Seems like my only choices are feat or race?

[JusticeZero]

That's typical, really. They don't mind ten distinct magic subsystems that don't have the word "psionics".