PDA

View Full Version : Yet Another Soulknife Variant (P.E.A.C.H.)



Ninmast
2009-12-18, 07:29 PM
So, after being threatened with my character being knifed in his sleep by one of my fellow players due to the Soulknife's over-encumbered load of problems, flaws and vulnerabilities, my friend and I set out to search for an alternate build. Unfortunately, being picky as I am, none of them that we could find really appealed to me. To me, they all seemed to be too strung up on adding things to the class that made it something else. None of them seemed to grasp the actual concept of the Soulknife as I saw it. Too many tried (and failed) to make it a rogue, while others added powers or other abilities, and an annoying frequency of them simply said, "Oh, just take a different class!"

But I didn't want to take a different class, I didn't want to be a rogue, and if I wanted to use powers, I would have been a straight Psion. I wanted to be a Soulknife. Period. So I set out to make my own variant, increasing the various abilities of the class, making some a little sooner, changing some things around so they functioned better. I'll provide a link to my variant (since I hate converting tables from word to forum post) and try to outline the various changes I've made. If I miss a few, my apologies.

-----------------------------------------------
Download Link:
Soulknife Variant (http://www.humyo.com/F/273863-2307913475)
-----------------------------------------------

The first thing that had to change was the Base Attack Bonus. He's supposed to be a fighter, yet his attack was abyssmal. So I gave him full B.A.B.

Second was his fortitude save, same reason. Now, I know technically, all classes start with either 0 or 2, but I didn't really feel comfortable giving him full Monk saves, so I went halfway, starts with +1, ends up with +8.

Next change was to the mind blade, itself. Being limited to pick from only three bland, basic weapons felt too limiting for something formed from the will and imagination of the sentient mind, so I gave the class first the ability to choose ANY light weapon at first level for the form of their mind blade, though they still aren't allowed to change it until they get Shape Mind Blade. This skill also was upgraded to allow the selection of any simple or martial weapon, be it light, one-handed, two-handed or ranged. I also allowed exotic weapons, but only under the condition that the character has the proficiencies he would need otherwise. Without them, he takes the normal -4 penalty for non-proficiency. I also added Mind Finesse, which I've seen around for others, allowing him to use his dex bonus for both attack and damage in place of his strength with any light weapon or rapier his mind blade takes the shape of. This, however, doesn't apply to any real weapon he may use.

Then I turned my head to the damage, itself. It gained power far too slowly compared to what other classes would likely gain from picking up weapons, so I sped up the rate at which it increased, and, since our campaigns tend to get a little heavy on the combat stats, I went ahead and upped it to a maximum of +10 at level 20. I also sped up the rate of Enhancement Bonus gains and raised the maximum from +4 to +6. I am aware that for real weapons, neither is actually possible, but since this mind blade is the one singular ability of this class, I thought it might be more acceptable. I also modified the accepted enhancements to choose from to include, not just the new abilities given in the chart for the Soulknife, but also any enchantment that could normally be placed on a weapon, as well. As a safety measure, any ability granted to a weapon that is form-specific (such as Vorpal) is lost when the weapon is switched to a form that does not support it until it once again regains a form that can. I think we can all agree that Vorpal Bolts, while entertaining, probably wouldn't be very fair.

I also granted the character Weapon Specialization (Mind Blade) and Greater Weapon Specialization (Mind Blade) at levels 4 and 12 respectively, since, unless you're multiclassing from at least twelve levels of Fighter, you'd never be able to get them, and it gives the class a little more kick.

I changed Free Draw to Quick Draw, which does the same thing but allows throwing weapons at full attack speed, and removed the outrageously late 17th level Multiple Throw ability.

Finally, I added Enhanced Psychic Strike, allowing one charge to last for all attacks you take in that round. Inspiration from this comes from the Duskblade's Arcane Channeling, which also upgrades at level 13, and I removed the mind-affecting limitation from the ability. While the target must still be living and nonmindless, the overly-common "Immunity to Mind-Affecting" no longer renders the biggest ability of the class completely null.

So, get back to me, let me know what you think!

Scarlet Tropix
2009-12-18, 07:35 PM
As the player who threatened the knifing in the first place, I have to say that while I am impressed at Ninmast's commitment to this class, I don't think that this fixes everything.

I also am interested in your judgement.

The Rose Dragon
2009-12-19, 07:36 AM
Your entire shtick is that you have a weapon. Every class can have a weapon, and they get other stuff on top of that.

mohdri
2009-12-19, 12:33 PM
Your entire shtick is that you have a weapon.Bolded text added.

Being able to get any weapon (which does have advantages), would encumber even the strongest fighter.

A couple of other things I did was 1) reduce the time it took to change your enhancements to an hour (instead of 8 hours with a feat to reduce it to a minute), 2) allow more enhancements, similar to Soulbow and 3) added Use Psionic Device to their list of class skills (yes, this sounds very Roguish).

I also changed the progression of when they get their weapon properties to the same level as their enhancements (level 4,8,12,16,20). But at level 8 or higher, they can pick more properties instead of increasing actual enhancement bounus (taking advantage of Greater Magic Weapon as other meleers can).

Ninmast, I like what you did with Psychic Strike (at 13th level last for full attack), and might use that for my homebrew, as I was looking for a way to boost PS a little, and that is probably it. Thanks.

Surgo
2009-12-19, 12:39 PM
Your big level 1 class feature is to have a 5 gp weapon. That's the entire thing that was wrong with the Soulknife in the first place. How is this a fix?

Tavar
2009-12-19, 12:40 PM
Does it really have advantages, though? I've never seen a character have more than 2-3 weapons at a time, and those are rare case. Plus, for main melee characters, encumberance is a joke, considering that Str is likely your most important attribute.

As for the enhancement list, I've never seen a reason that it can't just be open to any enhancement.

Temotei
2009-12-19, 01:14 PM
Also, moderate saves go like this:

+1
+1
+2
+2
+3
+3
+3
+4
+4
+5
+5
+6
+6
+6
+7
+7
+8
+8
+8
+9

In your post you said it ended at +8. I haven't looked at the class though, so you might have caught that.

Ninmast
2009-12-19, 01:17 PM
The Rose Dragon:

No, my entire "schtick" is that I have a weapon manifested at will from my mind. If I just wanted any old weapon, I would've chosen Fighter. Sometimes, we forget that code isn't all that exists, and that concept is equally as important. After all, we're roleplaying, not rollplaying.

Mohdri:

Thanks for that input, and I'm glad you liked the enhanced psychic strike. As a friend of mine pointed out when we were going over all the things that needed changing, the original Psychic Strike lost almost all practicality once you start getting more attacks per round, either by level or whenever the team mage starts throwing around Haste. Duskblade had the same problem, but came with a built-in fix. Why Wizards didn't give Soulknife one, too, we may never know.

I like the idea of making the "enhancement bonus" more of a pool of what they can "spend" on enhancements, rather than an actual bonus. To me, that's more how it's meant to be, anyway, especially since they get an enhanced Attack and Damage for the weapon as they level, anyway. I also think I'm going to see if my DM will let me cut down my "enchantment" time, as well. You were really helpful!

Surgo:

Yes, as I've said, I'm well aware that the entire kick of the Soulknife is that you get the cool weapon, and everything else is centered around improving that weapon. That's the whole purpose of the class. If that's not what you want the class for, that's your call, but as that's exactly what I want the class for, that's fine by me. As I said in my first post, my goal was to enhance the class, not rewrite it into some other class entirely.

Tavar:

My goal wasn't to give it clear advantages over other classes, only to bring it up to the level of other classes. In fact, I don't actually see the character that I'll be using changing weapons very often. He starts with a katar, will double-wield when he gets the ability to do so, and probably won't switch to anything else unless the situation requires it, for instance if he requires a longbow. In fact, I don't imagine anyone will use Shape Mind Blade with any particular frequency. They'll probably come into it with a particular style in mind and stick with it throughout. The ability to choose any weapon is intended for character flexibility and to reflect the creativity of the sentient mind, not with the actual intent for it to be frequently utilized.

I do agree with you on the enchantments, which is why I expanded it to include any of them, instead of the miniscule list allowed in the original Soulknife.

Temotei221:

Thank you for pointing that out. I wasn't sure how it went, so I just tinkered with the numbers until it came out to a nice number at level 20.

Raiki
2009-12-19, 01:17 PM
Your big level 1 class feature is to have a 5 gp weapon. That's the entire thing that was wrong with the Soulknife in the first place. How is this a fix?

This is actually a fairly good fix. The main class feature isn't "have a 5gp weapon", as so many people seem to think. The main class feature is "Be a fighter, plus actual class abilities, plus bonus damage, plus have a weapon that can't be disarmed, can't be stolen, can't (really) be sundered whose enhancements scale drastically faster than WBL without having to use any of your WBL to get it." And that's not even getting into the ability to rewrite your +16 weapon to tailor it directly to fighting that draco-demilich you know you're coming up against. +10 vicious, disrupting, undead fierce-bane, magebane, spell-storing maul? Yes please.

And that's just the tip of the iceburg. Knife to the soul gives a basically fighter-class character an option other than "I attack it for HP damage". Allowing that at lower levels actually makes it useful. Given it's not a huge difference, but it's better than what they had before.

I'd say that this fix solidly bumps the Soulknife up to tier 4, maybe even a low tier 3 due to the enhanced versatility.

But again, that's just my 2 coppers.

~R~

Tavar
2009-12-19, 01:40 PM
No, my entire "schtick" is that I have a weapon manifested at will from my mind. If I just wanted any old weapon, I would've chosen Fighter.
Then Psycic Warrior does it better. Esspecially with the soulbound weapon AFC.

Additionally, you can disarm it. Nothing in the text says otherwise, and as it's a light weapon it's not even that difficult to do.


Sometimes, we forget that code isn't all that exists, and that concept is equally as important. After all, we're roleplaying, not rollplaying.

A) Stormwind Fallacy.
B) If roleplaing is what matters, why does it need a fix?
C) Strawman arguments aren't becoming.
D) If your base class does things worse than similar base classes, especially if those base classes are tier 4-3, what's the point?



Yes, as I've said, I'm well aware that the entire kick of the Soulknife is that you get the cool weapon, and everything else is centered around improving that weapon. That's the whole purpose of the class. If that's not what you want the class for, that's your call, but as that's exactly what I want the class for, that's fine by me. As I said in my first post, my goal was to enhance the class, not rewrite it into some other class entirely.

Then you aren't making a fix. The whole point of a fix is to fix the problems with a class, not ignore them. Granted, you are fixing some, but others really aren't being fixed.


My goal wasn't to give it clear advantages over other classes, only to bring it up to the level of other classes. In fact, I don't actually see the character that I'll be using changing weapons very often. He starts with a katar, will double-wield when he gets the ability to do so, and probably won't switch to anything else unless the situation requires it, for instance if he requires a longbow. In fact, I don't imagine anyone will use Shape Mind Blade with any particular frequency. They'll probably come into it with a particular style in mind and stick with it throughout. The ability to choose any weapon is intended for character flexibility and to reflect the creativity of the sentient mind, not with the actual intent for it to be frequently utilized.
Right, but I was replying to mohdri's comments. If an ability is inconsequential, it's not really a factor in their favor.


I do agree with you on the enchantments, which is why I expanded it to include any of them, instead of the miniscule list allowed in the original Soulknife.
Yeah, though you might want to rephrase then Mind Blade Enhancement section: drop the chart and just say that they can use any ability. More elegant that way.


On the Psychic Strike: still seems awkward, mainly because it takes a move action to charge. You'll end up doing more damage with a a regular full attack.

Knife to the Soul: overpowered. You need to add a save for this, especially since it pretty much will auto-KO anything in the book at the levels you get it.


Personally, I still feel that this is at the same level as a fighter. Okay, but nothing special, and other classes will preform their role better.

Ninmast
2009-12-19, 03:01 PM
Then Psycic Warrior does it better. Esspecially with the soulbound weapon AFC.

Additionally, you can disarm it. Nothing in the text says otherwise, and as it's a light weapon it's not even that difficult to do.

You're not listening. I just said in the quote you made that if I wanted another class, I would have chosen it. I also had no interest in PP dependency. And yes, it can be disarmed, but the point is that he's just going to manifest it again on his next turn, so you effectively haven't hindered him in any way.


A) Stormwind Fallacy.
B) If roleplaing is what matters, why does it need a fix?
C) Strawman arguments aren't becoming.
D) If your base class does things worse than similar base classes, especially if those base classes are tier 4-3, what's the point?

I don't know if you're trying to insult me and are just trolling or if you're just not listening.

A) I have no clue what you mean by "Stormwind Fallacy," and to be blunt, I couldn't care less.

B) It needed a fix because codewise, it couldn't keep up, which would have eventually been a hindrance to the rest of the party. Regardless of this, roleplaying still is what we should be putting foremost. Just because we utilize stats and dice in order to govern the fair and (hopefully) balanced flow of combat, that doesn't suddenly mean that it's the be-all, end-all of the game.

C) See Retort A.

D) The point is that my base class does it the way I want it to. The same reason why someone would choose between any of the spellcasting classes out there. You can take any of them and do just about the same thing, so why pick one over the other? Concept.


Then you aren't making a fix. The whole point of a fix is to fix the problems with a class, not ignore them. Granted, you are fixing some, but others really aren't being fixed.

Then you have a strange definition of what it means to fix something. The Random House Dictionary gives us this definition:

fix  /fɪks/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [fiks] fixed or fixt, fix⋅ing, noun
–verb (used with object)
1. to repair; mend.
2. to put in order or in good condition; adjust or arrrange

Strange, not one word of that even remotely comes close to "turning it into something else." All of that definition seems to imply that to fix something means to put it in a way that it once again functions in the manner it was intended. Huh, go figure. It seems the only way your concept of "fix" could possibly apply is if you thought the entire class was in error and that nothing about it remotely function or even could with the proper adjustments. But then, even then, we would be using the verb, "replace," not "fix."


Right, but I was replying to mohdri's comments. If an ability is inconsequential, it's not really a factor in their favor.

Funny, I wouldn't really consider the ability to have any weapon one might need on hand at any given time inconsequential. Again, you have some funny definitions.


Yeah, though you might want to rephrase then Mind Blade Enhancement section: drop the chart and just say that they can use any ability. More elegant that way.

The reason I did it the way I did was because the class had the skills I left in the chart marked as "new," so to ensure they were on hand and available, I left the chart in there.


On the Psychic Strike: still seems awkward, mainly because it takes a move action to charge. You'll end up doing more damage with a a regular full attack.

Then a better recommendation than trying to say it irrepairably sucks would probably be to recommend a level for inserting an ability to activate it as a free action.


Knife to the Soul: overpowered. You need to add a save for this, especially since it pretty much will auto-KO anything in the book at the levels you get it.

That was an ability in the original class. I did not alter it in any way. Oh, wait, does that mean you're saying this class that you apparently despise with every fiber of your being actually has something good about it? Wow, fancy that ...


Personally, I still feel that this is at the same level as a fighter. Okay, but nothing special, and other classes will preform their role better.

Y'know, contrary to what seems to be popular belief, THERE'S ACTUALLY NOT A DARN THING WRONG WITH A FIGHTER!!! I'm sorry you can't picture playing a single character that can't will your opponent to melt into a puddle of ooze as a free action, but I'm thankfully not limited to the same linear thinking as you seem to possess.

Temotei
2009-12-19, 03:39 PM
will your opponent to melt into a puddle of ooze as a free action,

I thought it was a standard action, unless you quickened it.

Tavar
2009-12-19, 03:43 PM
I don't know if you're trying to insult me and are just trolling or if you're just not listening.
You need to seriously calm down. If you can't take any criticism of your class, then don't post it on the internet. I have yet to see a class that doesn't draw some criticism, and mine is pretty mild.

A) I have no clue what you mean by "Stormwind Fallacy," and to be blunt, I couldn't care less.
And you loose major points there. Ignorance is not a virtue, and a refusal to learn is a flaw. The Stormwind fallacy is the following: the idea that roleplaying and rollplaying are mutually exclusive. They are not, and often times they go hand in hand.



B) It needed a fix because codewise, it couldn't keep up, which would have eventually been a hindrance to the rest of the party. Regardless of this, roleplaying still is what we should be putting foremost. Just because we utilize stats and dice in order to govern the fair and (hopefully) balanced flow of combat, that doesn't suddenly mean that it's the be-all, end-all of the game.
But real "roleplayers" wouldn't care about that.

Seriously, if you make a fix, you're directly acknowledging that mechanics matter, so get off your high horse. Plus, it's not a good idea to make groundless accusations, especially if you opened yourself up to criticism in the first place.

C) See Retort A.
And you loose major points there. Ignorance is not a virtue, and a refusal to learn is a flaw. The Strawman fallacy is when you, instead of attacking someone's arguments directly, attack a fake, weaker argument that you can counter easily. This proves nothing, as the original argument is still there.

D) The point is that my base class does it the way I want it to. The same reason why someone would choose between any of the spellcasting classes out there. You can take any of them and do just about the same thing, so why pick one over the other? Concept.
Actually, each of the spell casting classes works very differently mechanically, and the separate spell lists make them function very different in play.



Then you have a strange definition of what it means to fix something. The Random House Dictionary gives us this definition:

fix  /fɪks/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [fiks] fixed or fixt, fix⋅ing, noun
–verb (used with object)
1. to repair; mend.
2. to put in order or in good condition; adjust or arrrange

Strange, not one word of that even remotely comes close to "turning it into something else." All of that definition seems to imply that to fix something means to put it in a way that it once again functions in the manner it was intended. Huh, go figure. It seems the only way your concept of "fix" could possibly apply is if you thought the entire class was in error and that nothing about it remotely function or even could with the proper adjustments. But then, even then, we would be using the verb, "replace," not "fix."[/QUOTE]
Another strawman, and this one even more blatant. See, when I say X, you need to respond to X, not statement Z that you'd rather argue against.

See, one thing about a class that's tricky is that it's made up of a lot of separate parts. While it's true that you have fixed(ie, mended, repaired, etc) some of there, others have not been fixed(ie, mended, repaired, etc), namely it's lack of options, it's ability to do jack a higher levels, essentially, the problems of most melee classes.



Funny, I wouldn't really consider the ability to have any weapon one might need on hand at any given time inconsequential. Again, you have some funny definitions.
It pretty much is, though. Weapons are cheap, and carrying capacities large. It's not a bad quality, but not a good one, either. Plus, you might want to read the post I was originally replying to. You seem to be arguing from an odd angle.



The reason I did it the way I did was because the class had the skills I left in the chart marked as "new," so to ensure they were on hand and available, I left the chart in there.
Huh? What does skills have to do with this?



Then a better recommendation than trying to say it irrepairably sucks would probably be to recommend a level for inserting an ability to activate it as a free action.
I wasn't actually thinking about it that way. I guess it works as a free action, though it makes changing Knife to the Soul even more important. And I didn't say it irrecoverably sucked, just that it was weak as written. You seem to be reading a lot more into people's statements than what they actually say.


That was an ability in the original class. I did not alter it in any way. Oh, wait, does that mean you're saying this class that you apparently despise with every fiber of your being actually has something good about it? Wow, fancy that ...
Being overpowered does not equal good. Additionally, originally it was only a couple points at the beginning of combat. Now, it's about 25 damage to a single stat. That's a huge difference. That's why it needs to be changed. Once again, classes have a lot of interlocking parts, and changing one part of the class might very well necessitate a change on an other.

And when have I ever said that I despised the class? Please, provide a quote. Because I don't remember saying that. Seriously, you're taking this way to hard. If you can't take constructive criticism, perhaps you shouldn't post stuff on the forum and ask for constructive criticism.

Y'know, contrary to what seems to be popular belief, THERE'S ACTUALLY NOT A DARN THING WRONG WITH A FIGHTER!!! I'm sorry you can't picture playing a single character that can't will your opponent to melt into a puddle of ooze as a free action, but I'm thankfully not limited to the same linear thinking as you seem to possess.
...

Okay, seriously, stop the personal attacks. They don't make your argument better, nor do they make you seem more mature. Quite the opposite, in both cases.

Now, to address your argument, I don't. I never said you should make it just a good as wizards. In fact, wizards are a bit too good. But you should be able to contribute to a party in most encounters, which this one fails to do. That's not good design. Just like the fighter is useless most of the time, and even when he's not, he has to have the full support of full casters to make up for his shortcomings.

Ninmast
2009-12-19, 04:39 PM
Oy ... I won't lie, Tamar. You annoy the heck out of me, and if I sound high-horsed, it's because I feel as if I am responding to your own mounted charge. When you raised valid points, I answered them. When you seemed to be doing nothing but trolling, I called you on it. Unfortunately, in all your long post of quoting other posts I've made and accusing me of pulling a "Strawman," you made all of ... let me count ... four points, maybe. That leaves one to wonder just what the rest of your post consisted of.

I can take plenty of criticism to it, and when you actually provided criticism, such as recommending Psychic Warrior, mentioning the enchantment options, pointing out that you still couldn't full-round attack with Psychic Strike, I answered these things in a very civil, direct manner. Yes, I may have some temper problems that are triggered when I'm attacked, but maybe, just maybe, you have some problems controlling your own tongue? Maybe? No?

I did not care what a Stormwind Fallacy or a Strawman argument were because they did not apply to the matter at hand. Another time and place would have been more appropriate. As for the S.F., since I specifically said in the very post you said that in response to that concept is EQUALLY as important as the code, it seems that your accusation falls apart. You lose points. Note, that's one o, not two.

I also never said that mechanics DIDN'T matter. In fact, I specifically said that poor mechanics on one character can hold back the entire team. It might interest you to know, however, that I originally was not interested in changing the class around. I did so to appease another member of our group so that I would not hold us back. Thus, as a "real roleplayer," you're right, I didn't care about the mechanics.

And since his entire "argument" was that the class sucks because the entire "schtick" is that you get a weapon, I believe my response that:

my entire "schtick" is that I have a weapon manifested at will from my mind,
is completely a response to his actual argument. I then proceeded to elaborate upon that response, saying that I chose the race for its concept, its role-playing potential, and not for its code, or roll-playing potential. Once again, it seems you should be taking your own advice against groundless accusations. And then you wonder why I got so upset with you.

You then proceeded to make a Strawman Argument of your own by ignoring my point that many choose between spellcasting classes based on concept, since any of them can pretty much accomplish the same general thing, and just arguing that, "Well, they all actually have different mechanics." That wasn't the point, you KNOW that wasn't the point, and yet that's what you tried to argue. By your own definition, you just lost more points.

And instead of constantly saying, "Oh, yeah, you haven't fixed it. Sure, you've fixed a LITTLE, but there's still all SORTS of problems," why don't you lay some of those problems out and then we can address them? As for lack of capability to do anything at higher levels, I'd disagree, In fact, I'd point toward Raiki's post of just how many options the class has. The ability to be ready for any opponent is no little quality, and again, so what if he can't cast fifty Swift Fireballs out his nose? If I wanted to do that, I'd be using a spellcaster, which you, yourself, have admitted are overpowered, anyway.

As for the comment concerning the ability to have any weapon on hand, your original comment was that you didn't believe it was truly beneficial. It would seem to me, however, that being guaranteed to have a weapon you need on hand, whether you're out in the desert, in a bustling city or rotting in a jail cell, and as a bonus, not having to dig it out of your pack, would be a pretty beneficial thing.

As for the enchantments comment, I greatly apologizing for calling the potential options, "skills," instead of something more appropriate. I assumed that the reader would be able to use context clues instead of automatically assuming the only possible use for the word was for that long list of things you pay ranks into every level.

Now, I'm not entirely sure why you are under the impression every class must be capable of doing all things, when a party consists of a TEAM. Yeah, any kind of fighting class is charged with the role of taking hits and dishing them out. That's their job. Yeah, they have spellcasters to support them. That's THEIR job. They also have healers to make sure they can KEEP taking those hits and trap monkeys to help them save those hits for when they're actually needed. Everybody on the team has their job. Each position contributes to every encounter in their own way, but I'm willing to hear you out on just why you believe this class can't contribute in the way it's meant to contribute. If, you know, you ever get around to actually doing such.

Solaris
2009-12-19, 05:09 PM
I see this thread ending very swiftly if everyone doesn't start playing nice. Ninmast, he was being pretty darn civil. You should see the hate I get when I post one of my class fixes.

Hmm. I've been tinkering in my head with some ideas about the Soulknife - what if he's able to form more than just weapons, but armor as well?
I always gave Soulknives full BAB, monk saves, flurry, and monk bonuses to AC. IIRC, I also gave 'em boosted speed. The Swiftblade might also be a good class to blend into the Soulknife, particularly their ability to haste.

Ninmast
2009-12-19, 05:13 PM
Hmm, those are some good suggestions, Solaris, though I don't really want them to just be "monks with a mind blade," either. I originally did not give them full Fort Save for that reason, but if you don't think it would be too disruptive ...

Also, what book is Swiftblade in? It sounds good, but I'm not familiar with it.

Solaris
2009-12-19, 05:19 PM
Hmm, those are some good suggestions, Solaris, though I don't really want them to just be "monks with a mind blade," either. I originally did not give them full Fort Save for that reason, but if you don't think it would be too disruptive ...

Also, what book is Swiftblade in? It sounds good, but I'm not familiar with it.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/prc/20070327
Adapt as necessary. I gave it the monk stuff because I saw the Soulknife as being similar to a monk, but with an almost anime-like speed in addition to the mindstuff blade. Mind over body and all that.

mohdri
2009-12-19, 05:41 PM
There's some pretty good Soulknife feats in Dragon #341, if you can find it. Thery're not that great on their own but as a bonus feat they're not bad.

I took out Speed of Thought as a bonus feat, and added in a generic "bonus" feat at that level. The feat must be a [Psionic] feat or one that enhances your mind blade. So if you still want "Speed of Thought" you can still get it, but it opens it up to other feats as well.

As an add-on, I also added a second bonus feat at 17th level, same restrictions.

And I would also recomend the Hidden Talent varient (2PP plus one 1st level power) over Wild Talent, and open Hidden Talent to being taken more than once, for Soulknives only.

Tavar
2009-12-19, 06:08 PM
Oy ... I won't lie, Tamar. You annoy the heck out of me, and if I sound high-horsed, it's because I feel as if I am responding to your own mounted charge. When you raised valid points, I answered them. When you seemed to be doing nothing but trolling, I called you on it. Unfortunately, in all your long post of quoting other posts I've made and accusing me of pulling a "Strawman," you made all of ... let me count ... four points, maybe. That leaves one to wonder just what the rest of your post consisted of.
Umm...I raised a counter-point to each of your points: hint, each of your points is in a seperate quote box, and I made the point underneath. Yes, some of my points are repeats, but that's because some of yours are two, or they can be countered with the same arguement. Additionally, I fail to see what quantity has to do with anything.

Oh, and please, tell me, what actions of mine are so objectionable? See, this is pretty much my normal posting method, and you're the first person to take issue with it.


I can take plenty of criticism to it, and when you actually provided criticism, such as recommending Psychic Warrior, mentioning the enchantment options, pointing out that you still couldn't full-round attack with Psychic Strike, I answered these things in a very civil, direct manner. Yes, I may have some temper problems that are triggered when I'm attacked, but maybe, just maybe, you have some problems controlling your own tongue? Maybe? No?
No. My tone is pretty reasonable, and this board is a pretty calm one. So far, you're the one who seems to be flying off the handle at the slightest provocation. Seriously, no one was less than civil, giving honest opinions. You then dismiss most of those out of hand, and insult both those posters and others who don't think that this class is great as is.

I did not care what a Stormwind Fallacy or a Strawman argument were because they did not apply to the matter at hand. Another time and place would have been more appropriate. As for the S.F., since I specifically said in the very post you said that in response to that concept is EQUALLY as important as the code, it seems that your accusation falls apart. You lose points. Note, that's one o, not two.
When your argument relies on both of them, well, then, yes they do. You prefer not to answer others points, instead insulting them and then demolishing much weaker points that are only tangentially connected to their original points. The point is, that while the class is flavorful it doesn't really give you anything substantial. And no, the mindblade isn't substantial.

Oh, and sorry about the typo.

I also never said that mechanics DIDN'T matter. In fact, I specifically said that poor mechanics on one character can hold back the entire team. It might interest you to know, however, that I originally was not interested in changing the class around. I did so to appease another member of our group so that I would not hold us back. Thus, as a "real roleplayer," you're right, I didn't care about the mechanics.
Good for you. Still, when presenting a class, and others tell you the mechanics are weak, don't yell about how there's flavor and mechanics. Flavors mutable, mechanics less so.


And since his entire "argument" was that the class sucks because the entire "schtick" is that you get a weapon, I believe my response that:

is completely a response to his actual argument. I then proceeded to elaborate upon that response, saying that I chose the race for its concept, its role-playing potential, and not for its code, or roll-playing potential. Once again, it seems you should be taking your own advice against groundless accusations. And then you wonder why I got so upset with you.
Well, that schtick does suck. Seriously, while it is cool/interesting, mechanically? It sucks. That's why most of our suggestions are more along the lines of adding stuff.

You then proceeded to make a Strawman Argument of your own by ignoring my point that many choose between spellcasting classes based on concept, since any of them can pretty much accomplish the same general thing, and just arguing that, "Well, they all actually have different mechanics." That wasn't the point, you KNOW that wasn't the point, and yet that's what you tried to argue. By your own definition, you just lost more points.
Actually, no, no I didn't. My point was this:

Actually, each of the spell casting classes works very differently mechanically, and the separate spell lists make them function very different in play.

Note the last part. That is the crux of the argument. Sorry, no points lost there.

And instead of constantly saying, "Oh, yeah, you haven't fixed it. Sure, you've fixed a LITTLE, but there's still all SORTS of problems," why don't you lay some of those problems out and then we can address them? As for lack of capability to do anything at higher levels, I'd disagree, In fact, I'd point toward Raiki's post of just how many options the class has. The ability to be ready for any opponent is no little quality, and again, so what if he can't cast fifty Swift Fireballs out his nose? If I wanted to do that, I'd be using a spellcaster, which you, yourself, have admitted are overpowered, anyway.
Others have laid some out, only to be dismissed out of hand and insulted. But I'll give you a list at the end of this post.

As for Raiki's post, it still relies on the enemy to play very stupidly, or for the casters to focus their efforts on letting you contribute, instead of contributing themselves. That's not a good thing.

As for the comment concerning the ability to have any weapon on hand, your original comment was that you didn't believe it was truly beneficial. It would seem to me, however, that being guaranteed to have a weapon you need on hand, whether you're out in the desert, in a bustling city or rotting in a jail cell, and as a bonus, not having to dig it out of your pack, would be a pretty beneficial thing.
Lesser Crystal of Returning-allows you to draw it as a free action, and to will it to come to you if it's within 30ft.
Ring of arming-stores a set of armor and a weapon.
Gloves of storing-stores a weapon
Generally, it's a move action to draw a weapon, or a free action done as part of a move action(if BaB of +1 or greater).

This is ignoring the fact that those situations are specific enough that being able to avoid them isn't a real boost. Yes, being immune to the fiery breath of the third red dragon born in the year XXX is a benefit. It's just not one that's substantial enough to be factored into whether or not the class is good.

As for the enchantments comment, I greatly apologizing for calling the potential options, "skills," instead of something more appropriate. I assumed that the reader would be able to use context clues instead of automatically assuming the only possible use for the word was for that long list of things you pay ranks into every level.
...
...
Generally, I try not to assume things, especially since the internet takes alot of context out of stuff. Still, it's rather unintuitive to provide both a list and then say that they can use any other ones. Why not just say that they can use any special qualities.

Now, I'm not entirely sure why you are under the impression every class must be capable of doing all things, when a party consists of a TEAM. Yeah, any kind of fighting class is charged with the role of taking hits and dishing them out. That's their job. Yeah, they have spellcasters to support them. That's THEIR job. They also have healers to make sure they can KEEP taking those hits and trap monkeys to help them save those hits for when they're actually needed. Everybody on the team has their job. Each position contributes to every encounter in their own way, but I'm willing to hear you out on just why you believe this class can't contribute in the way it's meant to contribute. If, you know, you ever get around to actually doing such.
I'm not under that impression at all. Since when does this statement:
But you should be able to contribute to a party in most encounters, which this one fails to do. mean that?

Yes, you shouldn't be able to do everything, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to contribute in most situations. This class can't and I find that an unfortunate thing. You say that every person should be able to contribute, well, it's been proven that often times melee can't. Not unless the DM favors them, or everyone else helps them contribute.


As for why the class is flawed, look here (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5070.0). Specifically, it's in teir 5, same as the original soulknfe.


Also, looks like you're deciding to add more to the class. Good.

Ninmast
2009-12-19, 06:25 PM
After reading it over, Solaris, I think Swift Surge would be a suitable replacement for Speed of Thought.

Swift Surge (Ex): Your body is augmented with the residual energy of previous haste castings. You gain a +1 bonus on attack rolls and a +1 dodge bonus to AC and Reflex saves. At 7th level, these bonuses increase to +2. At 4th level, you gain a +10 foot enhancement bonus to all of your modes of movement and deal an extra 1d6 points of damage during any round in which you move at least 10 feet. At 10th level, this bonus increases to +20 feet and an extra 2d6 points of damage during any round in which you move at least 20 feet. These bonuses stack with the bonuses gained from the haste spell and skirmish ability.

I think I'll put that in. Thanks for the direction. All the rest, though, seems focused on spell requirements, and even were I to adjust them, I think all combined, it'd probably be a bit much.

Mohdri, I like your recommendation for Hidden Talent. It's not really for me, though. As I said, I don't really have any interest in having powers with the class. Do you know where maybe I could find a PDF of Dragon #341?