PDA

View Full Version : What's Wrong with the Complete Psion?



JackMage666
2007-03-20, 10:21 AM
So, I see lots of bad talk about the Complete Psion. I don't get it, it doesn't seem too bad to me. I mean, yeah, it's not a great book, but it's got some good new classes and a few cool feats to add. It seems especially helpful if you want to make an all psionic party, because it gives you the Lurk, so you can now cover all the basic party ideas with Psionic classes.

But what's so wrong with it, it doesn't seem too bad? What makes it blasphemy again Psionics?

Fax Celestis
2007-03-20, 10:24 AM
*It nerfed when it should have augged. (See: Astral Construct)
*The formatting is horrid.
*Most of the feats and powers are either too weak or should've just been flavor decisions (like those mindblade shaping feats. WTF.).
*The monsters and PrCs are unimaginative.
*The fluff on the new base classes is completely against everything else psionics is about (Divine Mind getting psionics from faith, wtf).

That pretty much sums it up for me.

the_tick_rules
2007-03-20, 10:40 AM
i'm not a fan of psionics in general. every psion i've seen played is totally broken and way too powerful.

Rarkasha
2007-03-20, 12:04 PM
That's... not very helpful considering the question and the entire topic of the thread.

Not to mention you're now opening the door to tons of people (of which I am tempted to be one of), who will carefully explain why psionics is not broken, and then derail the thread. I'm not saying you're trolling, though.

The complete psionic is a book a lot of people hate because it's not very useful, for the reasons Fax has listed above. On the other hand, I do like the Lurk. But that's about the only thing about the book I do like, which is not really worth it.

AmberVael
2007-03-20, 12:08 PM
There are a few minor things in Complete Psionic which are worth your time, but otherwise...
I mean, a few of the new powers are pretty fun.
I think there was one feat I liked, but I can't remember it. :P
The Lurk is nifty.
But for the most part, it really isn't too good. I find it to be better than most people say it is, but that still doesn't say much.

pestilenceawaits
2007-03-20, 12:21 PM
I agree there are a lot of problems with the complete psionic but I don't think it is completely useless. there are some cool prestige classes (illumine soul, ebon saint) and the Lurk is really cool even the other classes aren't that bad just the fluff is. it is one of those books that if you read through it and like what you see then it will be usefull but if it doesn't fit your game it is useless it doesn't fit in a general category like may of the other complete books.

Ikkitosen
2007-03-20, 12:25 PM
I like the psionic race with 3 minds - the ardent is easily abuseable but ok - other than that many things are poorly thought out.

storybookknight
2007-03-20, 12:38 PM
Maybe I can explain.

The problem that many people have with Complete Psionics is that it's inconsistent. Simply put, the "advantage" of having a completely psionic party isn't necessarily quite so obvious.

The main problem is that Psionics is essentially an add-on to the 3.5 rules. There are no psionic classes in the Player's Handbook, and while there are "psionic" monsters in the Monster Manual, none use psionic powers or psi-like abilities. Notably, check out the Illithid and the Aboleth. Similarly, there are no psionic items in the DMG.

What this means is that 3.5 psionics isn't really contiguous with everything else - but is that really a problem? What, functionally, is the difference between a Fighter, Wizard, Rogue, Cleric party and a Fighter, Psion, Rogue, Cleric party? There isn't that much of one!

What Complete Psionics tries to do, though, is it tries to open up the possibility for an all-psionic game. Hey, not a problem, right?

The problem isn't with the motive but rather the execution. "Planar Psionics" are added in, where people are drawing strength not from their inner mind but rather from some plane or another. You get Stygian Psionics, Celestial Psionics, and Who-Knows-What Psionics, none of which really match the flavor of the original game. Gameplay balance issues aside, the reason so many dislike it is because it takes away what they liked about Psionics to make it more similar to core D&D. You have psionic paladins, psionic clerics, and psionic rogues, but if you want a cleric, you can play one, rather than the weird psionic variant that doesn't really make much sense in terms of flavor.

There are a number of additional flaws, but the core design aesthetic of the book is, IMHO, responsible for most of them - trying to make it more like normal D&D was really not the best of plans.

Annarrkkii
2007-03-20, 12:47 PM
Kudos, props, and... other internet congratulations to StorybookKnight. That's my primary problem with the Complete Psionics—it's trying to make parallels were there aren't any.

Psionics should be distinctly different from Arcane and Divine magic—a category of it's own. No one has tried to make Arcane casters who derived their power from gods, or Divine caster's who cast without any sort of outsider/deity/causal support. As such, it makes no sense to try and make Psionics a part of the other sections.

Lurk is an interesting idea, but I do not approve of its execution. I think it would better be covered by a PrC for Soulknife, or perhaps for Psionic Warrior or the Spelltheif from CAdv. I think Complete Scoundrel actually addressed that, in a slight way, though I can't recall how, exactly. I think a feat that allows powerpoint drain...

Anyway, I also find a large number of the feats to be useless or overly specific and silly. Illithid Heritage feats only further confuse the whole mess that supplements have made of Illithid culture. Soulbow is just a weird prestige class, and the rest, in my opinion, don't really deserve specific references. Of course, Psionic PrCs in general (save the Thrallherd) are sometimes pretty strange. Some of the powers are nifty.

I like psionics a great deal. I liked the XPH rather a lot. I was exceedingly disappointed by the Complete Psionics book—it just jumbles the system further. I want a better supplement! Hmph.

Above all, while the above faults are severe, they might be bareable were it not for the pricetag. I am NOT parting with 20 SoBes' worth for a few nifty powers and some interesting ideas.

Ramza00
2007-03-20, 12:52 PM
Complete Psionic isn't bad, it is just ungood. The feats, prcs and flavor are bad flavor wise or mechanically lacking. Combine with some flavor changes to some specific things (looking at mind flayers half-illithid , now we have to use time travel from the future to be internally consistent, or divine psionics) these things irks people, plus astral construct getting nerf...

Finally XPH is one of the best supplements in design, flavor, and balance ever published by WOTC in 3.5. To have its "sequel" be so not good followed by what you used to treasure you have star wars prequel vs OT syndrome.

Ramza00
2007-03-20, 12:55 PM
i'm not a fan of psionics in general. every psion i've seen played is totally broken and way too powerful.
Myth: The XPH is overpowered
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=331253

Additionally psionics is way more balanced to the rest of D&D than the wizard/sorcerer is. I will leave other posters to actually argue that if you want to hijack this thread.

AmberVael
2007-03-20, 12:59 PM
Above all, while the above faults are severe, they might be bareable were it not for the pricetag. I am NOT parting with 20 SoBes' worth for a few nifty powers and some interesting ideas.
:smallbiggrin:
I'm so in agreement with that sentiment.
And yeah, Storybookknight has hit it on the head, I think. I couldn't really place it, but that sounds about right. Plus some of the stuff in it is just not all that great anyways.
However, I highly believe in editing the fluff and keeping mechanics for a lot of DnD things. I think it could be done with a great deal of Complete Psionics.
Stygian powers? Crunch-wise they are just powers that deal in negative energy. Just describe it as "siphoning energy" from someone and avoid the planar connection.
Celestial/Fiendish powers? Psionics are a power of the mind- your personal beliefs have a great deal to do with how you think, right? Why shouldn't you be able to "manifest your inner self" or something less cheesy? Again, no planar connection.
The classes are obviously harder to deal with, but I think it could be done.

The problem, however, is that we shouldn't have to do this much work to make it work. It can be done, but should we have to do it? Its work that we are paying for, right? Yeah. So that is the problem.

Ramza00
2007-03-20, 01:12 PM
To the original poster the story is Complete Psionic was canceled a month prior to is expected release. Even though it was canceled unfinished copies of this work hit the internet and few hard copies that could be located at second hand stores. Because it is unfinsh a DM is going to have fill in the blanks and edit some stuff out (it would have been edited out anyway but the project was canceled prior to completion)

(A common joke about CPsi :smallwink:)

Assassinfox
2007-03-20, 01:17 PM
No one has tried to make Arcane casters who derived their power from gods

Some PrCs and feats have tried, but not very well.


or Divine caster's who cast without any sort of outsider/deity/causal support.

Archivist. :smalltongue:

Fax Celestis
2007-03-20, 01:39 PM
Some PrCs and feats have tried, but not very well.



Archivist. :smalltongue:

Or Ur-Priest.

Assassinfox
2007-03-20, 01:41 PM
Or Ur-Priest.

That's still getting power from a deity, though. Just not with permission. :smallbiggrin:

ravenkith
2007-03-20, 01:44 PM
The biggest problem with complete psionic?

It just doesn't stack up when compared to books like complete arcane and complete divine. Arguably it's the closest to complete scoundrel, but even that book managed to bring in some new & interesting things, what with the luck feats & the tricks.

okpokalypse
2007-03-20, 01:50 PM
In terms of Base Classes, I've played all 3 and they are rather balanced and well laid. The Divine Mind is actually really good for groups at high levels. Unfortunately, the flavor of them just stinks. They've gone way too far to have "Divine Psionics" and it just lacks a lot.

There's actually a 4th Base Class at the end of the book (after the Racial Classes) - the Erudite. It's the Wizard version of the Psion (kinda-sorta). They can learn as many Powers as they come in contact with, and automatically gain 2 per level as well. They however are limited in the amount of unique powers they may manifest per day. They gain the same PSPs as a normal Psion, and they may learn Powers from other class lists as well - provided the Power learned is one level lower than current max. Not bad really.

For PrCs, few are worthwhile. Anarchic Initiate is great for Wilders. Soulbow is a nice flavor for Soulknives. Zerth Cenobite is fun flavor for Psionic Race Monks. That's about it. There aren't nearly enough full Manifestor progression PrCs - which is a shame.

As far as Feats go, yeah, most are not very useful. The few General ones I find nice are the Energy Feats and the Mantle Feats. The Xeph Celerity racial feat is nice as well. And the MetaPower feat is a must-have - often multiple times.

The real strength of the Book though comes from the new Powers within. There's a lot of very good (some quite overpowered) powers in there. Some are:

Anicipatory Strike (Accellerate your turn - Immediate)
Claws of Darkness (Similar to Claws of the Beast - Extendable to 10' Reach)
Damp Power (Minimize Power/Spell Used against you - Immediate)
Stygian Bolt (Augmented, Maximized, Empowered bestows 12 Negative Levels)

Bears With Lasers
2007-03-20, 09:30 PM
i'm not a fan of psionics in general. every psion i've seen played is totally broken and way too powerful.

Are you kidding me? That's ridiculous. Psionics is like arcane magic only less good at anything except for blasting.

It only becomes "broken" if you ignore the rules (were these psions spending more PP on a power than their Manifester Level? Hmm...)

Fizban
2007-03-20, 10:13 PM
I liked the Erudite, and maybe 2 feats. The rest of it sucked, for reasons detailed by Fax and storybookknight. I like the Eruidte because it's the only spontenous caster that can learn more than his base allotment of spells. The only downside is that I'd have to convert my favority arcane spells into powers, but that's not hard. The feats I liked were the kind of must-have feats that everyone would take.

I disliked the deity/planar psionics enough to mention it personally: the whole point of psionics is that is comes from your own personal brain. Anything else should be relegated to a PrC, or forgotten because it violates the point.

Ranis
2007-03-20, 10:18 PM
The problem with CPsi is the fact that it's psionics, and they are always bad.

Period.

Jack Mann
2007-03-20, 10:35 PM
Care to explain that? I mean, I could say that the problem with Complete Adventurer is that it has stuff for rogues, and rogues always suck. But unless I backed that up somehow, people wouldn't take me seriously. And people won't likely be taking your post very seriously either.

Assassinfox
2007-03-20, 10:37 PM
The problem with CPsi is the fact that it's psionics, and they are always bad.

Period.

Kinda ironic coming from someone with a mindflayer for an avatar.

broderickdruce
2007-03-20, 10:42 PM
The problem with CPsi is the fact that it's psionics, and they are always bad.

Period.

I don't know why people say this, I wish they would at least explain, and if this opinion is based on 3.0 psionics...*shudder*

I agree that psionics is more balanced than wizards and definitely more so than druids and clerics. For example it took 2 level 6 psions (Kineticist and Psycoportive) to take out a CR 8 Dragon and it took most or our PP and HP.

On topic: I mainly like it for a prestige class or two. the powers are definitely under powered. One example i can think of is Energy Arc (or something like that) which is a few levels higher than energy missles but can't do as much.

Aquillion
2007-03-21, 12:27 AM
One of the big things: IIRC, there are no psionic PRCs with full power progression. None. That's a pretty major game-balance improvement when compared to arcane and divine casters, who have PRCs that give them massive new abilities completely for free out of the wazoo.

Druid
2007-03-21, 01:28 AM
No, one of them does. the anarchic initiat I think.

JackMage666
2007-03-21, 02:10 AM
Doesn't the Cerebremage as well? Yeah, you have ot sacrifice a few levels for some wizard levels, but that's not so bad, is it?

CockroachTeaParty
2007-03-21, 02:18 AM
I agree with everyone so far that Complete Psi was lackluster. However, I still use it quite a bit, in conjunction with the various Mind's Eye stuff from the WotC site, and I've even hungrily devoured third party psionic rules. I love psionics, I do I do.

Complete Psi irks me in many ways, but it is passable if you treat its wounds. I know that we shouldn't have to do this, for we payed for the blasted thing, but here's what I do anyway...

-Ardents and Lurks are fine. Flavor-wise, I change Divine Minds into crusading Ardents with a more martial bent, and I give them a fighter's BAB progression.

-I ignore the Astral Construct nerf, as well as the Ectopic Adept PrC (the Constructor from the Mind's Eye is much better).

-The previously mentioned fluff alterations to Stygian and alignment-based powers are similar enough to how I explain them.

-The 'Touch of Health' power from the Life mantle I change, so that it heals 3 hp per PP spent, especially if it's a game void of divine magic.

If you do this, and ignore the more awful feats (Ectopic forms...), the book can add a lot of depth to a psionic-themed game. However, if you use Complete Psionic as an afterthought or simple add-on to a normal game of D&D, you'll probably just end up looking silly.

Why couldn't it have been more like Complete Arcane or Warrior? Just a shatload of PrC's and new powers... For Pete's sake, I haven't even read all the PrC's in Complete Warrior yet! I get tired! What the heck does Purple Dragon Knight do?

Well, if you crave psionics like a black tar heroin addict, you've probably already purchased Complete Psi, like me, and you cry crystal tears into your ectoplasmic pillow every night, because you are a thrall to the big, squishy, spooky Elder Brain that is WotC... If you are free, child, and breath the clean air of the surface world, then cherish your freedom, and stay away from the darkness....

Merlin the Tuna
2007-03-21, 03:01 AM
Bam. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=10986361&postcount=3)

These words included because the board said I needed more.

Marius
2007-03-21, 05:46 AM
I have to agree with Fax but I did liked the Soulbow, it's a great pcr for the underpowered Soulknife.

AmoDman
2007-03-21, 06:13 AM
I have to agree with Fax but I did liked the Soulbow, it's a great pcr for the underpowered Soulknife.

I like it too, and I've never even seen the book (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060403a&page=2).

Jayabalard
2007-03-21, 08:43 AM
The problem with CPsi is the fact that it's psionics, and they are always bad.

Period.isn't that kind of ironic coming from someone with a mind flayer avatar?

Not that I really care for psionics in fantasy RPGs in general, or D&D psionics in specific.

hewhosaysfish
2007-03-21, 09:00 AM
On the subject of the various types of planar psionics: Many of the powers in the XPH invloving drawing ectoplasm from the Astral Plane. Is it so inconcievable that a intelligent and/or curious psionicist with enough ranks in Knowledge(PLanes) might try to streeeeeech that little bit further and grab a handful of fire from the Plane of Fire, or water or negative energy?

As for the divine psionics....
I agree it makes about as much sense as a divine rogue who gets all his skill-points, not by being good with traps or sneaking, but is granted them by a god. Or a fighter-type who had never picked up a sword until his god went "Ping! Now, you're awesome!".
No sense.

Aquillion
2007-03-21, 09:47 AM
isn't that kind of ironic coming from someone with a mind flayer avatar?

Not that I really care for psionics in fantasy RPGs in general, or D&D psionics in specific.I really think that using the word 'psionics' was a mistake way back when the concept was first added--psionics is an extremely modern term. If they'd called them "mentalists" or something similar, I suspect they wouldn't get nearly so much flack.

And personally, I think that with a name change like that they'd fit into most games better than druids or monks, both of whom are extremely setting-specific. Personally, I think it was a mistake to make them core classes... Cleric/Mage/Thief/Fighter represent general archtypes, while Paladins, Rangers, Sorcerors, and Barbarians are alternate takes on them that can fit in any world. Monks and druids, though, refer to extremely specific genres and settings, and don't really belong outside of them.

Person_Man
2007-03-21, 10:27 AM
I'm of the opinion that they should take the material from XPH and include it in core 4.0 D&D when it comes out, and banish 90% of the CP material.

In my opinion, a good supplement should:

1) Add good fluff to the game, to give players and DMs new ideas.
2) Add new encounters/maps/organizations other material specifically for the DM.
3) Adds new base classes or PrC options that come directly from the fluff and do something that hasn't been done before.
4) Adds new feats/spells/items that create new build options without breaking the game.
5) Is well edited.
6) Has nice art.

Examples of excellent suppliments are the PHBII, Stormwrack, Heroes of Battle, or the Draconomicon.

But CP does none of these things. While there are a few nifty PrC and feats, the fluff sucks, there is almost no DM specific material that would help me run a game, the new classes mostly suck and/or ruin pre-existing psionic fluff, its poorly edited, and the art is unimaginative.

Fax Celestis
2007-03-21, 10:34 AM
Examples of excellent suppliments are the PHBII, Stormwrack, Heroes of Battle, or the Draconomicon.

I would include the ToB, the ToM, and Magic of Incarnum in that list, myself.

CockroachTeaParty
2007-03-21, 02:59 PM
Oh, and is mentioned previously in a link on the 1st page, do yourself a favor and look up Untapped Potential. Best $5 I've ever spent.

Person_Man
2007-03-21, 03:33 PM
I would include the ToB, the ToM, and Magic of Incarnum in that list, myself.

I agree. But I generally don't use them in the games I DM, because half of my players are relatively new, and would have a very hard time with the additional rule mechanics. (Heck, it took us a year just to integrate psionics). Whereas setting books, PHBII, and similar supplements just add a lot of DM content and new player options - so the newb player only has to remember what their Beguiler (or whatever) does and what the DM tells them about the encounter, not memorize a whole new set of Maneuver rules.

But if you're playing with veterans, they're certainly good additions, especially Tome of Battle.

storybookknight
2007-03-21, 06:39 PM
Seconded on Tome of Battle, both for the "don't give it to new players" aspect and for how good it is. Definitely a worthwhile book, but it can be confusing for new players, as I found recently from experience.

I do have one quibble with the above criteria for a good supplement: it should also be mechanically balanced. Tome of Magic, for example, has some issues with Truenaming, making it not quite as strong a choice as Tome of Battle. Personally, I'm not a fan of Incarnum either, but that's just because I don't like the idea.

Ramza00
2007-03-21, 07:06 PM
I would include the ToB, the ToM, and Magic of Incarnum in that list, myself.
I would subtract Tome of Magic from that list but re add binders to that list.

Khantalas
2007-03-21, 07:09 PM
But Truenaming is the best!

I guess different tastes for different people, though. I'll just sleep hugging my the Name and the Soul, knowing that the power of truenames preserves good.

The_Snark
2007-03-21, 09:41 PM
The binder's good, but don't leave out the rest of the book! Shadow magic is fun and doesn't have the massive balance issues most spellcasters have. Truenaming's okay too, though there are a few things that bug me about it. The examples of truenames all sound silly to me, and I don't much like the Truenamer class, but spellcasters with Truename Training, using truename spells, are pretty cool.

Back on topic- I disliked Complete Psionic for reasons that have been covered pretty solidly already. The connection between elemental planes, positive/negative energy and psionics bugs me; it just seems sorta silly. Psions do draw from the Astral Plane, but that's because the Astral Plane is right there, in between everything else, and it's a readily available source of matter and energy. Psions can create fire or lightining or whatever without conjuring it from the Elemental Plane of Fire. Mindwipe, a negative-level power, already doesn't use negative energy.

Mechanically, most of the prestige classes were lackluster (Soulbow excepted, but that's soulknife only), and flavor-wise none of them caught my eye except the Anarchic Initiate. The powers were decent. Some of the feats are okay, and I'd actually be in favor of those Ectopic Form feats if you could apply more than one. (The Astral Construct errata still has to go, of course.) The feats were more so. I actually sorta liked the illithid heritage feats, since they're so easily attributable to illithid experimentation, but not all of them worked very well, especially the mind blast feat. It also suffered from poor editing in places (Anarchic Initiate's prerequisites. Why can't wilders get in without multiclassing?).

The base classes were a little better, but I disliked the idea behind the Divine Mind, and mechanically it's pretty bad also. Ardent is actually not bad, I think, playing a role sorta similar to the wilder in that it's a variant on the standard psion, with limited powers but extra class abilities. Lurk... meh. Overly complex, I thought; why not make something like a psychic warrior, but combining psion with rogue rather than fighter? (Mind's Eye did do that, actually.) Erudite's okay, I guess.

Overall, it just wasn't worth the money.

Ramza00
2007-03-21, 10:50 PM
But Truenaming is the best!

I guess different tastes for different people, though. I'll just sleep hugging my the Name and the Soul, knowing that the power of truenames preserves good.
I see Truenaming just like I see complete psionic, a nice idea in theory, mechanically bad, additionally not well thought threw, and I have issues with some flavor (but not all, I like most of it)

Ramza00
2007-03-21, 10:51 PM
Overall, it just wasn't worth the money.
It is very worth the money if you can get it used or extremely cheap. There are some good ideas and things that came out of it, it is just full of so much crap and wasted book space, thus not worth normal price.

JackMage666
2007-03-21, 11:55 PM
The problem I found with the Truespeaker is the DCs.... At high level, you can do one alright, but a low-level Truespeaker has some major issues, it seems. The DCs are almost always too high for most (non-optimized), Truespeakers.

Assassinfox
2007-03-22, 11:46 AM
I just hate the concept behind the Truespeaker. I never did like the Earthsea series. :smallannoyed: