Complete Psionic: Lurk (Passed)

Patlin · Oct 8, 2006

This thread is for discussing whether this base class from Complete Psionic should be accepted into LEB. Complete Psionic was originally released 4/11/06.

stonegod · Oct 15, 2006

I have CompPsi, and I actually have experience with a Lurk. The nearest comparison is with Rogues, but it is not exact. Bards or scouts also have parallels.

- Same BaB
- Good Ref and Will, not just Ref (like Bards)
- Power gain is closer in line with PsiWar; separate power list
- Can augment any melee attacks with ever increasing abilities.
- Ok skill points, but half of rogues
- No trapfinding

Lurks play like skirmish fighters with psionic adaptation; their powers assist this role. They do not seemed nerfed to me.

drothgery · Oct 15, 2006

I'm not sure if they're on par with PHBII Beguilers or CAdv Spellthieves as caster/sneaky-skill guys, though I don't think either of them are approved for Living Ebberon yet.

stonegod · Oct 15, 2006

drothgery said:
I'm not sure if they're on par with PHBII Beguilers or CAdv Spellthieves as caster/sneaky-skill guys, though I don't think either of them are approved for Living Ebberon yet.

Lurks -- Sneaky, skirmishy infiltrators/assassins
Spellthieves -- Caster breakers
Beguilers -- Masters of enchantment, less skirmishy

All are for slightly different roles, though there are overlaps (and they could try to do each other's jobs). Beguilers are spellcasters first and foremost, where Lurks are more spellcasting secondary.

Beguilers are probably more powered than Lurks, I'd agree there.

stonegod · Nov 10, 2006

We'll, since we're finally voting, I'll cast mine.

YES

Erekose13 · Nov 18, 2006

Lurks look fine as is, nothing wrong with them. I'd always wanted to see the psionic rogue on the WotC site in play and this seems like a different take on the same archetype.