Psionic Bias?

[Kylarra]

Yep.Additional text.

I knew I remembered seeing it somewhere. Thanks.

ironically involving the poster who posted above my original post. I CALL SHENANIGANS

[absolmorph]

The best part is that he reflected it on himself
Also, that's a lot of bullets.

[PhoenixRivers]

Ah, yes. That was a fun match.

[lesser_minion]

Mechanics for mechanics sake is in fact very worth it. Mechanics are there for the fluff - not - the other way around. If a mechanic works better for something that that mechanic was worth making. Why continually try to patch something to force it to do something, when you have a better system? Why try to make a cube roll when you could use a wheel?

I'm talking about volume of mechanics - as far as quality is concerned, yes, it's worth re-writing a system that's bad. But writing a whole new system just to sit alongside the existing system and make it look bad is not good design (or good marketing).

It's not even "trying to make a cube roll" - spell slots don't fit D&D psionics any worse than they fit D&D magic. The meaningful differences are:

• Foci and components are gone, with the exception of XP costs. Could fit with the existing system (spells can have a blank component line if desired).
• In place of having a chain of spells, you have one power that can be augmented to do what you want (a spell could be cast using a slot of your choice)
• Psionic powers have been adapted to be balanced under a points system, whereas spells haven't been. This wouldn't have needed duplicating.
• Metapsionic use is limited. Not difficult to duplicate ("you may only apply a single metamagic feat to each spell, but doing so does not increase the casting time.")
• No counterspelling. Which isn't that significant.

The only thing redeeming psionics here is that it's a functional replacement for the magic system. That was not the stated intent behind the XPH. And using two magic systems when one system would handle both tolerably is not smart.

The only reason to use 3.x-style spell slots for anything is more 'political psychosis' than anything else. But unfortunately, it's also a "you make your bed, you lie in it" deal, unless you happen to have a really good excuse.

[PhoenixRivers]

I'm talking about volume of mechanics - as far as quality is concerned, yes, it's worth re-writing a system that's bad. But writing a whole new system just to sit alongside the existing system and make it look bad is not good design (or good marketing).

It's not even "trying to make a cube roll" - spell slots don't fit D&D psionics any worse than they fit D&D magic. The meaningful differences are:

• Foci and components are gone, with the exception of XP costs. Could fit with the existing system (spells can have a blank component line if desired).
• In place of having a chain of spells, you have one power that can be augmented to do what you want (a spell could be cast using a slot of your choice)
• Psionic powers have been adapted to be balanced under a points system, whereas spells haven't been. This wouldn't have needed duplicating.
• Metapsionic use is limited. Not difficult to duplicate ("you may only apply a single metamagic feat to each spell, but doing so does not increase the casting time.")
• No counterspelling. Which isn't that significant.

The only thing redeeming psionics here is that it's a functional replacement for the magic system. That was not the stated intent behind the XPH. And using two magic systems when one system would handle both tolerably is not smart.

Depends on whether or not you like variety.

Such a principle could be used to justify using just the generic classes. After all, if a "Spellcaster" base class would handle divine, arcane, and what have you, and you insist on seperating it out into "wizard", "sorceror", "cleric", and "druid", isn't that "not smart"?

Variety for variety's sake. If it's not smart, so be it. I prefer to cater to my players. Some like one, some like the other. So both are allowed.

[lesser_minion]

Depends on whether or not you like variety.

Such a principle could be used to justify using just the generic classes. After all, if a "Spellcaster" base class would handle divine, arcane, and what have you, and you insist on seperating it out into "wizard", "sorceror", "cleric", and "druid", isn't that "not smart"?

Again, that's different. You can have a whole pile of magic classes, and you'll notice that all of those classes have differences. It's the differences that make the character classes.

But what they all have in common is the magic that they use, and the fact that they all use the same system for that magic.

If you look at psionics, you'll notice that they aren't made different enough to justify a new magic system. So the end result is that people have to learn two sets of rules which, to all intents and purposes, both do the same thing.

Binders aren't something that can be handled using spell slots. That's when it's OK to write a new set of rules. But writing a system based on spell slots and then using a points-based system for characters who:

• Could quite easily have used the existing magic system
• Didn't need to be like that.

Is a mistake.

[Saph]

Variety for variety's sake. If it's not smart, so be it. I prefer to cater to my players. Some like one, some like the other. So both are allowed.

As mentioned before, though, there are practical issues with having both.

You can't analyse psionics with Spellcraft and you can't analyse magic with Psicraft. So if you put any magical/psionic effect in front of a mixed party, only half of the caster-types will be able to study it. In practice, since magic-using things are much more common than psionic things, the psion is unlikely to get much use out of his Psicraft skill unless you specifically go out of your way to throw psionic effects at him.

Likewise with magic items - dorjes, powerstones, and psicrowns are completely useless to non-psionic characters. Contrast that to something like a wand of cure light wounds, where most characters in the party are likely to be able to use it one way or another (in the Test of Spite game I'm running, everyone in the party can use wands). This means that if you want to get items for the party psionicists, you can't use the standard random treasure tables - you have to pick out items for them. And if the party psion's away that session, any psionic items are just blunt objects until he gets back. Similarly for item creation - a normal party only needs a single high-level magic user to make any item they'll need. A mixed magic/psionic party needs two, so when building your world you have to set up two parallel magic-using structures instead of just one.

These are real issues. They're not impossible to solve - you can fix all of them. But it's extra work, and it's questionable how much payoff you get for it. In my opinion psionics works better as a replacement for magic rather than as a supplement for it.

[shadow_archmagi]

i don't suppose there's any chance someone could explain to me what happened to Olo? Why did he have guns? How did he do so much damage?

[Yuki Akuma]

He had guns because he wanted to have guns. He did so much damage ebcause he was using Lightning Mace and Aptitude weapons.

Lightning Mace lets you attack again each time you score a critical hit.

Death Urge causes you to perform a critical hit on yourself.

Therefore, he kept critically hitting himself until he ran out of bullets.

If he'd actually been using a melee weapon he would have caused infinite damage to himself...

[shadow_archmagi]

Hmmm.

1. Animate entire planet
2. Give planet lightning mace feat
3. Give planet mace
4. Use death urge

[Philistine]

The extra work required to say, "In this game, Psicraft is Spellcraft is Psicraft, and UPD is UMD is UPD, and a dorje is a wand is a dorje, and so on," is trivial, and fixes most if not all of the stated ills of the system. And while I agree that you shouldn't even have to do that much, is anyone at this late date surprised that WotC didn't think things (psionics/magic transparency, in this case) through to their logical conclusion?

[Yora]

Lightning Mace lets you attack again each time you score a critical hit.

Death Urge causes you to perform a critical hit on yourself.

Lightning Mace allows you to make an additional attack, but you are not forced to make it.
Death urge forces you to make a single attack.

I'd say even in RAW this doesn't work.

Binders aren't something that can be handled using spell slots. That's when it's OK to write a new set of rules. But writing a system based on spell slots and then using a points-based system for characters who:

• Could quite easily have used the existing magic system
• Didn't need to be like that.

Is a mistake.

I don't think so. It's an optional variant that may be used in addition to or in place of other magic systems. And so far, a great deal of people had great fun with it. So why is it a mistake to offer this option?

[shadow_archmagi]

Rules as written:

"If armed, the subject attacks itself as a full-round action."

Doesn't specify that you only get one hit. Also, if you have the OPTION to take extra hits, and you're feeling suicidal, then you would indeed take extra hits.

[Yora]

But it says attack as a full round action, not "full attack".

[NEO|Phyte]

He had guns because he wanted to have guns. He did so much damage ebcause he was using Lightning Mace and Aptitude weapons.

Lightning Mace lets you attack again each time you score a critical hit.

Death Urge causes you to perform a critical hit on yourself.

Therefore, he kept critically hitting himself until he ran out of bullets.

If he'd actually been using a melee weapon he would have caused infinite damage to himself...

As I pointed out back when this event first happened, Lightning Maces gives you an extra attack on a critical THREAT. Since Death Urge autocrits, no threat ever occurs, so Lightning Maces doesn't trigger.

[Ashiel]

As mentioned before, though, there are practical issues with having both.

You can't analyse psionics with Spellcraft and you can't analyse magic with Psicraft. So if you put any magical/psionic effect in front of a mixed party, only half of the caster-types will be able to study it. In practice, since magic-using things are much more common than psionic things, the psion is unlikely to get much use out of his Psicraft skill unless you specifically go out of your way to throw psionic effects at him.

Likewise with magic items - dorjes, powerstones, and psicrowns are completely useless to non-psionic characters. Contrast that to something like a wand of cure light wounds, where most characters in the party are likely to be able to use it one way or another (in the Test of Spite game I'm running, everyone in the party can use wands). This means that if you want to get items for the party psionicists, you can't use the standard random treasure tables - you have to pick out items for them. And if the party psion's away that session, any psionic items are just blunt objects until he gets back. Similarly for item creation - a normal party only needs a single high-level magic user to make any item they'll need. A mixed magic/psionic party needs two, so when building your world you have to set up two parallel magic-using structures instead of just one.

These are real issues. They're not impossible to solve - you can fix all of them. But it's extra work, and it's questionable how much payoff you get for it. In my opinion psionics works better as a replacement for magic rather than as a supplement for it.

It's worth noting that the Magic Item Compendium calls out that psionic characters may craft magic items and vice versa; noting that the they may be used interchangeably and the nearest equivalent spell/power be used in their place (meaning a psion can craft a necklace of fireballs by substituting an energy spell like energy burst).

Additionally, effects such as detect psionics can read magic as well, and by default identifies it as the nearest equivalent. That being said, it's incredibly easy to include Psi/Spell-craft and Detect Psionics/Spells under the transparency rules and call it a day. In my tabletop game, we have always done pretty much that. If someone casts Wish for example, they can mimic psionic powers with it (using the option to copy divine spells).

The act of saying "Spellcraft and Psicraft may be used interchangeably, as well as Use Magic and Use Psionic Device; finally if you detect Magic / Psionics, you determine the school or discipline strait out" is incredibly easy. That was very easy. If you come across something that isn't specifically called out in the rules (such as the aforementioned Wish example) is just a simple matter of common sense.

It's easier than trying to work the existing magic system to fit as many options for characters that the Psionics system can provide. The extra option for play-style and character customization is, I believe, entirely worth extending transparency to include more stuff (since it's virtually effortless).

Again, that's different. You can have a whole pile of magic classes, and you'll notice that all of those classes have differences. It's the differences that make the character classes.

But what they all have in common is the magic that they use, and the fact that they all use the same system for that magic.

If you look at psionics, you'll notice that they aren't made different enough to justify a new magic system. So the end result is that people have to learn two sets of rules which, to all intents and purposes, both do the same thing.

Binders aren't something that can be handled using spell slots. That's when it's OK to write a new set of rules. But writing a system based on spell slots and then using a points-based system for characters who:

* Could quite easily have used the existing magic system
* Didn't need to be like that.


Is a mistake.

The different system justifies itself. As I pointed out before; some people just prefer the feel and fun they can have with the magic system and some just prefer the feel and fun they can have with the psionics system. Interestingly, the psionics system can emulate core casting but not the reverse; at least not without jumping through a lot of hoops.

Binders can be played with the same mechanics with x/day magic. Technically you can planar binding creatures - particularly fiends - and have them possess you as part of your pact, while allowing you to be in control, to give you special magical powers from having stuff like succubi inhabiting your body. However, they're more fun with a different system.

I absolutely hate trying to pull of a telepath with standard magic. You have all vocal components, somatic hand-waving, and material-components that just totally kill it for me. The reverse is much easier; since you can entirely add in all the hand-waving, poetic words, and stuff optionally; or just enjoy the lightshow that accompanies psions who don't suppress their displays.

All the components and what-not also interfere with making more versatile characters. Multi-classing casters and other classes presents annoying hurdles such as being unable to wield weapons in your casting hand, or dealing with arbitrary spell-failure, and so forth. If I wanted to make a mage-knight who self-buffs or casts offensive spells like fireball now and then, I'd take Fighter/Psion any day over Fighter/Wizard; because it work better by default.

You see, the beauty of the system is it can enable so many types of concepts other than what is specifically spelled out. The system is designed to make for great psionic flavored characters; but it's versatile enough to build everything from Paladins, to the cast of Naruto*, to mystic monks who throw bursts of energy from their fists and jump through space, to classic sorcerers, to more exotic concepts that you think up on the fly.

The humorous thing about binders is that it's the perfect system for binder fluff. It is however incredibly difficult, nearly impossible even, to use the binder rules and mechanics for different types of characters; so its a very good but very limited system. Psionics does what it intends very well, and is also versatile enough to fit with countless other options.

Coupled with the previous points as to how Psionics is incredibly easy to manage and deal with, as well as being incredibly easy to re-fluff into a variety of concepts and arch-types. This is why fans of psionics love it so much...

It's not just because of Mind Bullets.

*: Making characters based off the cast of Naruto isn't really my thing, or the thing of anyone in my group to my knowledge; but it was done back on the WotC boards.

[Yora]

As I pointed out back when this event first happened, Lightning Maces gives you an extra attack on a critical THREAT. Since Death Urge autocrits, no threat ever occurs, so Lightning Maces doesn't trigger.

The attack automatically succeeds and deals damage as a critical hit.

Which explicitly says that it is not actually a critical hit.

[PhoenixRivers]

Rules as written:

"If armed, the subject attacks itself as a full-round action."

Doesn't specify that you only get one hit. Also, if you have the OPTION to take extra hits, and you're feeling suicidal, then you would indeed take extra hits.

You plant a hidden death-urge impulse
in the subject’s unconscious. On the subject’s next turn, it looks for
the quickest method to end its life and attempts to do so. The subject takes no
other action on its turn except attempting
to harm itself.
If armed, the subject attacks itself
as a full-round action. The attack automatically succeeds and deals damage as a critical hit. If unarmed, the subject moves adjacent to the nearest enemy and provokes an attack of opportunity, offering its opponent an opening, which the opponent may or may not choose to take advantage of. If the subject is unarmed and no enemy is nearby, the subject simply does nothing at all. At the Dungeon Master’s option, a subject close to an immediate and lethal hazard such as a cliff or a fire might hurl itself off the cliff or into the fire instead of striking itself with a weapon.

Emphasis mine. It points to a single attack which automatically crits.

As I pointed out back when this event first happened, Lightning Maces gives you an extra attack on a critical THREAT. Since Death Urge autocrits, no threat ever occurs, so Lightning Maces doesn't trigger.

Depends on your interpretation. If you assume that this crit follows all the standard rules for critical hits, and merely automatically succeeds (circumventing the need for a roll), then there is a threat. There is certainly nothing in the power description to contradict this interpretation.

Then, if you assume that the Death Urge allows the target to mystically attack its innards, circumventing the standard attack, then your interpretation could be valid.

It's up to each person to interpret how the rules are applied. If you give precedence to the standard rules for critical hits, and only alter them where explicitly instructed to, then you're absolutely wrong. If you consider it a magic attack, on par with magic missiles, then hey, you have a point.

[Oslecamo]

The different system justifies itself. As I pointed out before; some people just prefer the feel and fun they can have with the magic system and some just prefer the feel and fun they can have with the psionics system. Interestingly, the psionics system can emulate core casting but not the reverse; at least not without jumping through a lot of hoops.

Really?

Binders can be played with the same mechanics with x/day magic. Technically you can planar binding creatures - particularly fiends - and have them possess you as part of your pact, while allowing you to be in control, to give you special magical powers from having stuff like succubi inhabiting your body. However, they're more fun with a different system.

I still cannot use psionics to call a succubi, put her a leash and make her follow me. I could create a doll that looks like a succubi, but it would just be that: a doll.

I absolutely hate trying to pull of a telepath with standard magic. You have all vocal components, somatic hand-waving, and material-components that just totally kill it for me.

Professor Xavier and all the telepaths that make weird gestures when using their powers would like to have a word with you. Also, metamagic reducer and eschew materials. There's your component free caster.

The reverse is much easier; since you can entirely add in all the hand-waving, poetic words, and stuff optionally; or just enjoy the lightshow that accompanies psions who don't suppress their displays.

By that argument, pun-pun is the only viable build, because pun-pun can do everything, and then you add/remove stuff optionally.

All the components and what-not also interfere with making more versatile characters. Multi-classing casters and other classes presents annoying hurdles such as being unable to wield weapons in your casting hand, or dealing with arbitrary spell-failure, and so forth. If I wanted to make a mage-knight who self-buffs or casts offensive spells like fireball now and then, I'd take Fighter/Psion any day over Fighter/Wizard; because it work better by default.

Psion-fighter is just a little better than wizard fighter, since both are losing caster levels. On the other hand, wizard has more gish prcs and special options to get to cast in armor that you can point a stick at.

Cleric-fighter works even better. Or just cleric.

You see, the beauty of the system is it can enable so many types of concepts other than what is specifically spelled out. The system is designed to make for great psionic flavored characters; but it's versatile enough to build everything from Paladins, to the cast of Naruto*, to mystic monks who throw bursts of energy from their fists and jump through space, to classic sorcerers, to more exotic concepts that you think up on the fly.

You can't be a healer before lv5. You cannot summon stuff from the end of times(or from any place actualy). Your "familiar" is a rock with rock traits that you cannot get rid off, like don't being able to see anything behind 40 foot. And where's my polymorph any object? Shrink object? All the weird spells to mess up with physics and kill catgirls? Or tome of battle wuxia? When I want some crazy kung-fu, I pick up the book of nine swords, not a psion.

Coupled with the previous points as to how Psionics is incredibly easy to manage and deal with, as well as being incredibly easy to re-fluff into a variety of concepts and arch-types. This is why fans of psionics love it so much...

Funny you say how easy it is to use, because from my experience most people fail to understand the psionic rules by themselves, leading them to discard the system, even when they knew how to run core magic. Or end up running psionics wrong and claim they love psionics whitout noticing they actualy aren't using psionics.

*: Making characters based off the cast of Naruto isn't really my thing, or the thing of anyone in my group to my knowledge; but it was done back on the WotC boards.

Funny thing, they did it as well with arcane classes. Considering that at least the arcane Naruto was a human, while the psionic Naruto was some kind of psionic construct, I say the arcane version was better.

[Optimystik]

If you look at psionics, you'll notice that they aren't made different enough to justify a new magic system.

The fact that so many people disagree with you, and in fact love psionics as a system far and above vancian magic, proves you utterly wrong.

[krossbow]

There was the crit-tastic Soulknife who could change the shape of his weapon or something I still don't know how to explain.

Oh god... HAHAHAHA. LOOK OUT! HIS CLASS FEATURE GIVES HIM A WEAPON!

[lesser_minion]

The fact that so many people disagree with you, and in fact love psionics as a system far and above vancian magic, proves you utterly wrong.

Erm... what?

Your post doesn't even make sense.

Not only is the number of people who take a position utterly irrelevant to how right or wrong that position is (i.e. your post failed before it even started), but the popularity of something has no bearing on whether or not it was the right thing to do.

At no point have I said that psionics is a bad system. What I have said is that using two systems instead of one is bad design. So the one good point you might have made there... has no relevance whatsoever to this discussion.

There is no "you're either with psionics or against it" here. I like the system. What I don't like is the bizarre reasoning that led to its creation as written.

[Optimystik]

Erm... what?

Your post doesn't even make sense. Not only is the number of people who take a position utterly irrelevant to how right or wrong that position is (i.e. your post failed before it even started), but the popularity of something has no bearing on whether or not it was the right thing to do.

At no point have I said that psionics is a bad system. What I have said is that using two systems instead of one is bad design.

It's not about popularity. It's about you being unable to make sweeping statements about anything unless there is consensus.

Which, by the way, you're still doing. "X is bad design" is your opinion, and needs to be qualified as such.

By the way, magic can easily be adapted to a points system as well. If you don't want to use two systems... don't?

[Tavar]

Really?

I think the better statement is that you can easily have psionics act like regular magic without mechanically changing it. To do the same with Core casting requires you to get rid of all component beyond XP, which would significantly change some things. Plus, you still don't have the flexability that Psionics gives you with it's augment system and power point system.

I still cannot use psionics to call a succubi, put her a leash and make her follow me. I could create a doll that looks like a succubi, but it would just be that: a doll.

So? That's not his arguement. He's saying that you can play binders with the core magic rules. Not exactly as they are presented, but with the whole making pacts with extra-planar creatures and the like, and getting powers from them.

Professor Xavier and all the telepaths that make weird gestures when using their powers would like to have a word with you. Also, metamagic reducer and eschew materials. There's your component free caster.

Professor Xavier doesn't make weird gestures. At most he concentrates, which is something Psionics does too. Compare with the spell detect thoughts, which has verbal and somatic components, as well as a focus.

As for metamagic reducers, they're almost always banned due to power, and didn't really come into play for quite some time. I mean, the only ones I can think of that's in a book is Arcane Thesis, which applies to one spell, in the PHB2 and in Metamagic School Focus, in Complete Mage(I think this had a Per day restriction, but I'm not sure). So, for almost the entirety of 3.5's in print stage, you couldn't do it out side of Psionics.

By that argument, pun-pun is the only viable build, because pun-pun can do everything, and then you add/remove stuff optionally.

Strawman/completely misses the point. His point that it's easy to add fluff, but changing mechanics is much harder, and generally creates unforseen problems in balance.

You can't be a healer before lv5.

So, one concept that you can't really do before level 5. And the Wizard can do this any time he...oh wait. He can't. Huh. So, classes are limited in some ways? Imagine that!

You cannot summon stuff from the end of times

Neither can any type of Vancian magic I've seen. What's the point?

Your "familiar" is a rock with rock traits that you cannot get rid off, like don't being able to see anything behind 40 foot.

As opposed to the Familar/animal companion list which is entirely customizable....Oh, wait. It's not. Yeah, it has limitations, but so does any type of formal list.

And where's my polymorph any object? Shrink object? All the weird spells to mess up with physics and kill catgirls?

You mean the ones that are crazy broken? Well, they were trying to make a more balanced system. Plus, those don't really match with the theme of Psionics, which is more on self-manipulation. And they do have crazy powers, just different ones from Vancian casting. Again, what's your point?

Or tome of battle wuxia? When I want some crazy kung-fu, I pick up the book of nine swords, not a psion.

So, because you can do something with one set of rules invalidates any other set of rules that can do the same thing?

Also, again, ToB came out very late in 3.5's print cycle. What would you have done before that?

Funny you say how easy it is to use, because from my experience most people fail to understand the psionic rules by themselves, leading them to discard the system, even when they knew how to run core magic. Or end up running psionics wrong and claim they love psionics whitout noticing they actualy aren't using psionics.

This is actually because they don't read the rules. I mean, when I read the book, the rules on manifesting are very clearly spelled out in their own chapter, and from what I remember, very well formated. People just don't read the chapter on manifesting, and then complain when weird stuff happens. I've had people mess up the spell casting rules(2nd level spells at first level, core only). Is that because the system is difficult, or that they didn't read the material on their class?

Funny thing, they did it as well with arcane classes. Considering that at least the arcane Naruto was a human, while the psionic Naruto was some kind of psionic construct, I say the arcane version was better.

Why? If one of the versions more accurately reflects what he can do, and how he does it, why does being the same race as the original make the other better? Especially since claiming he's human is questionable. I mean, he's some combination of demon, that's supposedly changed him on a fundamental level.

[Starbuck_II]

You can't be a healer before lv5. You cannot summon stuff from the end of times(or from any place actualy). Your "familiar" is a rock with rock traits that you cannot get rid off, like don't being able to see anything behind 40 foot. And where's my polymorph any object? Shrink object? All the weird spells to mess up with physics and kill catgirls? Or tome of battle wuxia? When I want some crazy kung-fu, I pick up the book of nine swords, not a psion.

Complete psionics says you should read it again.
1st lv power Touch opf health heals 2 hp (4 if expend focus) in Life mantle.

You can summon stuff:
1) Elemental Steward (decent at low lvs)
2) Larval Flayers
3) Planar Champion: calls a Sibyllic Guardian or a Celebrilith
4) Shadow Eft

[Ashiel]

Really?

Yep.

I still cannot use psionics to call a succubi, put her a leash and make her follow me. I could create a doll that looks like a succubi, but it would just be that: a doll.

Maybe you misunderstood my point; or you are intentionally bending my words. I'll assume the former out of good faith. I never claimed psionics can fill in for a binder. I was pointing out that the argument could be made that Binders shouldn't exist because you could already create some sort of work-around using magic (which does everything); but that doesn't stop Binders from being lots of fun and worth playing.

I'm not sure how you failed to understand that, unless I just expressed it very poorly. I hadn't even mentioned psionics in regard to that.

Professor Xavier and all the telepaths that make weird gestures when using their powers would like to have a word with you. Also, metamagic reducer and eschew materials. There's your component free caster.

Yeah, I'm a huge X-Men fan too man. Total geek about it. I stand by what I said. Charles Xavier routinely speaks telepathically to people and doesn't make a lot of weird hand gestures to do stuff, nor does he chant vocal components, nor does he have to produce some sort of magic dust or something. In fact, the closest he comes to making somatic gestures is occasionally touching his head with his hand while concentrating (which people often do without it being supernatural); and he doesn't do such "gestures" all the time - nor are they required.

You also just pointed out that you need to spend lots of feats to force standard magic to fit into different concepts; and trying to work through system mastery and many more splat-books to make it do what you want it to. In other words: Jump through hoops. You can't do it out of the box.

By that argument, pun-pun is the only viable build, because pun-pun can do everything, and then you add/remove stuff optionally.

Are you serious with this comment? Seriously?

No, by that argument Pun-pun is not the only viable build. It's true that you could use "pun-pun" to mechanically represent virtually anything; unless you wanted to flavor your character as something other than a character (Paladin preferably) who sold their goodness to Pazuzu for godly powers and what-not. Also, Pun-pun is not a system; Pun-pun is an theoretical abuse of a lot of different rules and optional material.

In fact, I wasn't arguing over builds or anything of the sort. I was merely showing that for a variety of character concepts psionics can in fact mimic large portions of magic, and can be used to deal with a wide variety of concepts without needing the aforementioned hoop jumping. You're arguing nothing, and nothing is what you're arguing against.

You're taking it out of context. Bring it back into context then debate it if you wish, but don't pull BS like that because it's just foolish. Common sense man.

Psion-fighter is just a little better than wizard fighter, since both are losing caster levels. On the other hand, wizard has more gish prcs and special options to get to cast in armor that you can point a stick at.

Cleric-fighter works even better. Or just cleric.

Yep, lots of ways to twist the system to make it work for you. Mithril armor, spending feats or using prestige classes to cast in armor, or entering into a variety of prestige classes from different splat-books and so forth.

Again, you're also arguing something I'm not. I never suggested that a fighter/wizard or fighter/psion was even on equal terms with a strait-wizard or strait-psion (well, especially not a strait wizard). I was pointing out that you don't have to spend lots of feats and resources to succeed at being weaker. Instead, you can make a better mage-knight.

Also, cleric-fighter has lots of synergy, but also requires you to hold your holy symbol and be a cleric (with everything that comes with). It also doesn't do much if you want to throw around fireballs and similar things; or pull off cool magic-tricks beyond personal buffs, self-heals, or various save-based spells. Though truthfully if I was discussing builds, I'd skip fighter altogether and just be a cleric.

Or I could just play a Psychic Warrior and be a default-gish. Alternatively, I'm fond of Psion 8 / Ranger 2 / Slayer 10 for a BAB +16 gish with decent saves and solid casting/manifesting. But I'm speaking in terms of what we can do here with this system; not specific builds.

You can't be a healer before lv5. You cannot summon stuff from the end of times(or from any place actualy). Your "familiar" is a rock with rock traits that you cannot get rid off, like don't being able to see anything behind 40 foot. And where's my polymorph any object? Shrink object? All the weird spells to mess up with physics and kill catgirls? Or tome of battle wuxia? When I want some crazy kung-fu, I pick up the book of nine swords, not a psion.

Yep. You're correct. Since I was never suggesting anyone throw the core magic system out the window, I'm not sure what you're arguing here. Core magic does different things. That's not really much for how the system works but for what they are better at. The Psionics system was designed to be better at some things and weaker at other things. If psionics by default had everything core-magic does, then people would complain.

People would complain Psions can be the party's cleric and wizard at the same time. People would complain that it makes little sense for psions to be walking around manifesting psionic animate dead for flavor reasons. It was designed this way because it wasn't intended to be a replacement for core magic but another option for playing a different type of character.

That being said, it would be entirely possible to completely trash core magic and add new psionic powers (using the psionic system guidelines) to create psionic versions of spells like animate dead or polymorph any object or cure wounds. Such things were left out for specific reasons, but could be added to the system in one afternoon.

However, that's irrelevant for the most part because I was discussing the benefits and strengths of the system. How it can define a lot of arch-types. I never suggested it could fill ALL arch-types. You want to turn rocks into people? You play a wizard. You want to animate a legion of undead and be a competent warrior? Be a cleric or maybe a Dread Necromancer. You want to heal people? Play a cleric or bard or ranger with varying degrees of specialization or magic items. You want to play a spell-sword without jumping through hoops? Play a X/Psion; or a Psychic Warrior. You want to play a blastey caster who doesn't suck by default (but is limited in cheese), play a Psion or Wilder.

Yes, if you remove core casting completely, then you would need to add more powers and options into the Psionics system. It can in fact handle such options very effectively; whereas the reverse is not as true.

Funny you say how easy it is to use, because from my experience most people fail to understand the psionic rules by themselves, leading them to discard the system, even when they knew how to run core magic. Or end up running psionics wrong and claim they love psionics whitout noticing they actualy aren't using psionics.

That's funny indeed because I just pointed out the entire gist of the psionics system in my previous posts. Also, this friend of a friend arguments amuse me. Lots of people screw up using magic too. I've had people accidentally have too few spells per day, or too many. Or people who think you get 2nd level spells at 2nd level and 3rd level at 3rd. Mistakes are made everywhere.

There are lots of people who forget that you need cover and concealment to Hide. GMs and players alike I have seen make this mistake; then turn and say rogues are unbalanced because they have what amounts to instant non-magical invisibility.

I'd like you to explain to me how it's harder to learn, since I just summed up the system in my previous post. I explained your bonus spell/PP, your resources, and how you use them in a single paragraph; then gave an example of the learning curve following it.

At the very least, it's not harder to learn that standard magic; and in my experiences has been infinitely easier to teach new players than standard spell-casting. One player in my group loves playing barbarians and psions; hates wizards and clerics. Is in the middle with bards and sorcerers. He despises preparation based casting, and when he doesn't have the option for psionics generally just plays a warrior or maybe a bard. He finds them too confusing and convoluted, lacking in sense, and annoying. Another at our table, who loves Wizards endlessly and has never played a Psion at all, hates the way sorcerers cast spells almost like wizards. He hates that they're supposed to be drawing their power from a raw source, not just memorizing it or having "spontaneous memorization". He says Psions are better sorcerers.

Funny thing, they did it as well with arcane classes. Considering that at least the arcane Naruto was a human, while the psionic Naruto was some kind of psionic construct, I say the arcane version was better.

Hmmm. I didn't remember Naruto being a construct, but I'll take your word for it. Rock Lee was human if I recall though. What's better though? Technically wizards can do everything that everyone can do ever; but how easy is it to make it work? What's your idea of better?

[Ashiel]

<Stuff that explains my position better than I did.>

Thanks Tavar.

[lesser_minion]

The different system justifies itself. As I pointed out before; some people just prefer the feel and fun they can have with the magic system and some just prefer the feel and fun they can have with the psionics system. Interestingly, the psionics system can emulate core casting but not the reverse; at least not without jumping through a lot of hoops.

Binders can be played with the same mechanics with x/day magic. Technically you can planar binding creatures - particularly fiends - and have them possess you as part of your pact, while allowing you to be in control, to give you special magical powers from having stuff like succubi inhabiting your body. However, they're more fun with a different system.

Perhaps. I imagine that you would make the individual vestiges into something akin to spells.

However, it would take a lot of effort to make such a system balanced - at least enough effort that you could have written a completely new system from scratch.

I absolutely hate trying to pull of a telepath with standard magic. You have all vocal components, somatic hand-waving, and material-components that just totally kill it for me. The reverse is much easier; since you can entirely add in all the hand-waving, poetic words, and stuff optionally; or just enjoy the lightshow that accompanies psions who don't suppress their displays.

All the components and what-not also interfere with making more versatile characters. Multi-classing casters and other classes presents annoying hurdles such as being unable to wield weapons in your casting hand, or dealing with arbitrary spell-failure, and so forth. If I wanted to make a mage-knight who self-buffs or casts offensive spells like fireball now and then, I'd take Fighter/Psion any day over Fighter/Wizard; because it'd work better by default.

But those components are not appreciably harder to remove. The rules already support spells without components.

WotC wouldn't have needed to do much to get psionics working under a spell slot system - there are a few minor differences in rules (such as components), and a whole pile of content (which, in many cases, only needed re-writing because of the decision to use points).

My point is that it was a bad idea for WotC to write psionics the way they did from the outset. It might have had a positive ending, but it was still a mistake.

You see, the beauty of the system is it can enable so many types of concepts other than what is specifically spelled out. The system is designed to make for great psionic flavored characters; but it's versatile enough to build everything from Paladins, to the cast of Naruto*, to mystic monks who throw bursts of energy from their fists and jump through space, to classic sorcerers, to more exotic concepts that you think up on the fly.

Scarily, there wouldn't be much effort required to adapt the existing magic system either. You'd have to remove a few rules, but nobody misses rules that are inconsequential.

The humorous thing about binders is that it's the perfect system for binder fluff. It is however incredibly difficult, nearly impossible even, to use the binder rules and mechanics for different types of characters; so its a very good but very limited system. Psionics does what it intends very well, and is also versatile enough to fit with countless other options.

Being able to use other fluff isn't really important. Being able to do what it does well is important, and it being difficult to cannibalise an existing system is important.

[Starbuck_II]

My point is that it was a bad idea for WotC to write psionics the way they did from the outset. It might have had a positive ending, but it was still a mistake.

You do realize Wotc didn't invent psionics as a point system...that was TSR. WotC just continued the trend.

[Tavar]

But those components are not appreciably harder to remove. The rules already support spells without components.

WotC wouldn't have needed to do much to get psionics working under a spell slot system - there are a few minor differences in rules (such as components), and a whole pile of content (which, in many cases, only needed re-writing because of the decision to use points).

Actually, they kinda are. There are many spells and rules that are balanced due to difficult to acquire components. Need we remind you why the Spell-to-power Eurdite is considered so broken?

Plus, yes, if you change the mechanics, you can do a lot. But it's very hard to change meaningful mechanics without careful consideration. On the other hand, it's very easy to do this with fluff, and thus it's much easier to modify Psionics(you only have to change fluff, you can change mechanics if you want to) as opposed to Vancian(need to change both)

And this is only dealing with components. The fact of the matter is that Psionics is more fluid in how they cast, something that can only be approached by spontaneous casters, and even they are stuck in a spell slot system.

My point is that it was a bad idea for WotC to write psionics the way they did from the outset. It might have had a positive ending, but it was still a mistake.

Why?

Scarily, there wouldn't be much effort required to adapt the existing magic system either. You'd have to remove a few rules, but nobody misses rules that are inconsequential.

Spell Slots. There's an almost insurmountable problem right there(high powered shadowcraft gnomes get around it by shadow miracle abuse, but that's not really relevant).

Being able to use other fluff isn't really important. Being able to do what it does well is important, and it being difficult to cannibalise an existing system is important.

What do you mean "difficult to cannibalize"? And how does psionic fail either part of the equation?