Explain Unique Powers for Erudite to me

[atemu1234]

The description for unique powers describe them as [number] / spell level / day, but on other pages refer to it as just [same number] / day. Which is it?

[Necroticplague]

The description of the ability says "of each level per day", so thats what it is. What things that aren't the ability say about it is irrelevant.

[Rubik]

The description of the ability says "of each level per day", so thats what it is. What things that aren't the ability say about it is irrelevant.Yep. It's per spell level per day, so a 20th level erudite gains 11 1st level powers it can manifest per day, 11 2nd level powers it can manifest per day, and so on.

[Sian]

while it might be RAW, i somehow doubt that its RAI ...

[Rubik]

while it might be RAW, i somehow doubt that its RAI ...Unfortunately, all we have is RAW, unless we can somehow get hold of the person or people who wrote it, and they remember what they were thinking at the time.

[Psyren]

The intent is clearly for them just to be unique powers per day. For example, Epic Erudite states:


Unique Powers: An epic erudite's number of unique powers per day continues to increase after 20th level, but at a reduced rate. At 25th level and every five levels thereafter, an erudite can manifest one additional unique power. Thus, a 25th-level erudite can manifest twelve unique powers per day, a 30th-level erudite can manifest thirteen unique powers per day, and so on.

Going with the 11 per power level per day interpretation violates this text, because you are not "increasing" after 20 - instead, you are sharply decreasing its unique powers per day (from 99 down to 12.)

[Snowbluff]

If you have 2 pieces of material from a similiar source that have an equal chance to be untrue, which one do you use? :smallconfused:

The obvious answer is "The pre-epic one, because having 21 levels of Erudite would be crazy."

No, seriously. By RAW, you have 99 at 20 and 12 at 21. Without the I in RAI, we can't really make a judgement call to say otherwise.

[Rubik]

I'd rather just take an erudite as a follower or hire one to teach me powers (and spells) through Psychic Chirurgery.

[ZamielVanWeber]

This also does crazy things for the viability of the Erudite too, so I would talk to your DM first and find out which one he is willing to go with before getting too deep into character generation.

[Psyren]

No, seriously. By RAW, you have 99 at 20 and 12 at 21. Without the I in RAI, we can't really make a judgement call to say otherwise.

We do have the "I". If you go from 99 at 20 to 12 at 21, how are your UPD in any way "increasing" or "one additional?" This violates both RAW and RAI.

Anything that starts with "for example" is textbook RAI, quite literally so.


This also does crazy things for the viability of the Erudite too, so I would talk to your DM first and find out which one he is willing to go with before getting too deep into character generation.

They are plenty viable even with 11, it just really sucks at low levels. My advice is to ask your DM to rule for the Ardent progression as UPD instead of the Wilder progression (which it currently has.)

[ZamielVanWeber]

They are clunk masters if you rule on the stricter interpretation for the first 5-7 levels (unless you get your hands on some of the juicier exclusive powers). By high levels you are almost guaranteed to have a wide selection and I find that having a lot of good augmentable powers is what really lets you work with the 11 restriction.

[Forrestfire]

My suggestion is to toss out the Complete Psionic unique powers progression and use the original Erudite's, which was basically the Wizard progression of spells per day. Caps at 4 per level, much nicer to deal with.

[Snowbluff]

We do have the "I". If you go from 99 at 20 to 12 at 21, how are your UPD in any way "increasing" or "one additional?" This violates both RAW and RAI.

Anything that starts with "for example" is textbook RAI, quite literally so.

The problem is that they could have omitted the per level part by mistake as easily as they could have added it.

[Psyren]

The problem is that they could have omitted the per level part by mistake as easily as they could have added it.

They could also have added it to the two following sentences, to the table, to the combat section under "Playing an Erudite" and to the section header too. That is a total of one place saying "unique powers of each level per day" and at least 5 other places saying "unique powers per day," plus their mathematical example in the epic section lining up with the latter. So if probability is indeed a factor, the odds are heavily in favor of the 11 total per day.

[Snowbluff]

Or they assumed you knew what they meant when they says "powers per day per level," and didn't bother with writing it again.

[Psyren]

Or they assumed you knew what they meant when they says "powers per day per level," and didn't bother with writing it again.

That could have been a valid belief, except it is directly contradicted by the mathematical example they provided where they interpret "one additional" to mean "12." (and therefore, that you have 11 at 20th level.)

[Troacctid]

Or you could just read the errata file where they fixed it. Because that exists.


p. 153, Variant Psion Erudite, Class Features, Unique Powers Per day, 2nd sentence:
“[….] an erudite is limited to manifesting a certain number of unique psionic powers of each level per day from the repertoire of powers he knows […]”
Fix: delete the words “of each level”

Yeesh guys, you'd think that would be the first thing you'd check.

[Flickerdart]

They are clunk masters if you rule on the stricter interpretation for the first 5-7 levels (unless you get your hands on some of the juicier exclusive powers). By high levels you are almost guaranteed to have a wide selection and I find that having a lot of good augmentable powers is what really lets you work with the 11 restriction.
You can also manifest from a metaconcert, and use Soul Crystals to manifest yesterday's powers.

[ZamielVanWeber]

Huh? I thought they never published a CPsi errata. Where is this from?

Edit: And Flickerdart makes it obvious that I work with Ardents more than Erudites. Thanks :smalltongue:

[Sian]

Or you could just read the errata file where they fixed it. Because that exists.



Yeesh guys, you'd think that would be the first thing you'd check.

Reason why noone quotes the Errata File is because its unofficial third party.

At least its not something thats online on Wizards Errata page

[Snowbluff]

If CPsi was errataed, I'll gladly concede. That class is stupid either way. It has a crazy number of powers or a just a meager few. I'll have to work on a model that gives more flexibility at lower levels.

[Flickerdart]

If CPsi was errataed, I'll gladly concede. That class is stupid either way. It has a crazy number of powers or a just a meager few. I'll have to work on a model that gives more flexibility at lower levels.
It's not that bad - you have the UPD of a Wilder, but vastly more powers known to choose from. So you can do the ol' mordenkainen's extremely specific problem solver that wizards do, and only pay the opportunity cost on days you use it instead of every day.

[Psyren]

Or you could just read the errata file where they fixed it. Because that exists.



Yeesh guys, you'd think that would be the first thing you'd check.

Link?



Anyway, as I've said, the easiest fix (imo) is just using the Ardent progression as the UPD; start at 2 and add one each level until 21 at 20th. That's small enough for the limit to matter (you'll have fewer unique options each day than an equal-level Psion does) but large enough that you have multiple things you can do each day with your repertoire.

Also, what Flickerdart said - even going with the 11 you're hardly crippled, it's just annoying at low levels and dangerous for inexperienced players. Diving on the 99 interpretation to fix it is like burning your house down to kill a spider.

[Flickerdart]

Anyway, as I've said, the easiest fix (imo) is just using the Ardent progression as the UPD; start at 2 and add one each level until 21 at 20th. That's small enough for the limit to matter (you'll have fewer unique options each day than an equal-level Psion does) but large enough that you have multiple things you can do each day with your repertoire.
Yeah but then what reason is there to play an Ardent?

[Psyren]

Yeah but then what reason is there to play an Ardent?

SAD Psychic Ur-Theurge, Dominant Ideal, better BAB for Tashalatora builds, 9th-level discipline powers with Mantle Substitution... there's plenty of good reasons to be an Ardent.

[Snowbluff]

It's not that bad - you have the UPD of a Wilder, but vastly more powers known to choose from. So you can do the ol' mordenkainen's extremely specific problem solver that wizards do, and only pay the opportunity cost on days you use it instead of every day.

Well, ultimately I would emphasize availability of lower level powers and augmentation (with increased relevance) without precluding the above style of play.

[atemu1234]

Or you could just read the errata file where they fixed it. Because that exists.



Yeesh guys, you'd think that would be the first thing you'd check.


Huh? I thought they never published a CPsi errata. Where is this from?

Edit: And Flickerdart makes it obvious that I work with Ardents more than Erudites. Thanks :smalltongue:


Reason why noone quotes the Errata File is because its unofficial third party.

At least its not something thats online on Wizards Errata page


If CPsi was errataed, I'll gladly concede. That class is stupid either way. It has a crazy number of powers or a just a meager few. I'll have to work on a model that gives more flexibility at lower levels.

Yes, it's third party from the MinMaxboards.

[Flickerdart]

Yes, it's third party from the MinMaxboards.
So it's not errata at all, just someone's homebrew.

[atemu1234]

So it's not errata at all, just someone's homebrew.

Apparently. I'm not the one who posted it; I just googled "Complete Psionic Errata" it was in like the top five results.

[Psyren]

And Troacctid was never seen again :smalltongue:



Edit: And Flickerdart makes it obvious that I work with Ardents more than Erudites. Thanks :smalltongue:

Hey, I invented both those tricks, dammit! :smallbiggrin:

[Flickerdart]

Hey, I invented both those tricks, dammit! :smallbiggrin:
And don't you feel like a fool for giving them away for free now? :smallamused:

[Kalaska'Agathas]

And don't you feel like a fool for giving them away for free now? :smallamused:

Psyren didn't give them away for free - I made sure he got credit for the Erudite Concerto. Not much compensation, to be sure, but it's something!

[Flickerdart]

Psyren didn't give them away for free - I made sure he got credit for the Erudite Concerto. Not much compensation, to be sure, but it's something!
I don't recall having to pay for my tickets to the Erudite Concerto. :smallamused:

[Psyren]

I coulda been a contender. I coulda been somebody.