Core Rules Only

[Rystil Arden]

A psion is just a sorcerer with different mechanics. Cross out "Sorcerer" on your char sheet and replace it with "Mentalist" and presto, instant core-only psion.

The key part in your post is the 'with different mechanics'. You can't just label a sorcerer as a psion and be one, not without houseruling some class changes. Check upthread when this came up earlier.

 

[Glyfair]

I would play in a Core only game... though I probably wouldn't run one, since Eberron is my setting of choice. That being said, for Eberron I would and could happily limit myself to Core + XPH + Eberron only, the XPH being kind of essential to some elements of the setting. That is exactly what I am doing for my PbP.

I tend to use the term "extended core" to refer to games that include core only, the setting book of choice and the Expanded Psionic's Handbook. I'd be willing to include other optional magic system books, such as Tome of Magic, if they became commonly used (at the level that psionics is used).

 

[Spatula]

The key part in your post is the 'with different mechanics'. You can't just label a sorcerer as a psion and be one, not without houseruling some class changes. Check upthread when this came up earlier.

The topic was class types that couldn't be represented with the core rules. The extra baggage of the psionics-specific mechanics are not needed to play a psionics-type character - basically, a mystic, a mentalist, someone who can affect reality via mental powers vs the study of ancient tomes or the worship of great powers. The sorcerer already covers that in core, and you don't need the XPH at all (or any of the other splatbooks), just different flavor descriptions for a sorcerer or a slightly modified sorcerer. And I say that as someone that likes psionics and uses the XPH.

Your example comes down to "You can't play a mage that uses spell points instead of spell slots using the core rules," which is true but also meaningless. There's an infinite number of mechanical variations not included in the core rules, but that's true of any particular game system. What matters is that the role (as in role playing game) is represented.

 

[Rystil Arden]

The topic was class types that couldn't be represented with the core rules. The extra baggage of the psionics-specific mechanics are not needed to play a psionics-type character - basically, a mystic, a mentalist, someone who can affect reality via mental powers vs the study of ancient tomes or the worship of great powers. The sorcerer already covers that in core, and you don't need the XPH at all (or any of the other splatbooks), just different flavor descriptions for a sorcerer or a slightly modified sorcerer. And I say that as someone that likes psionics and uses the XPH.

Your example comes down to "You can't play a mage that uses spell points instead of spell slots using the core rules," which is true but also meaningless. There's an infinite number of mechanical variations not included in the core rules, but that's true of any particular game system. What matters is that the role (as in role playing game) is represented.

No, my example is that you can't play a psion who abjures all musty books and scrolls (couldn't use them even if she wanted to--her power comes completely from within) and prefers working with the mental power within, who doesn't carry around bat droppings and who doesn't make crazy gestures or chant words to cast his spells. Not without adding class features. You also can't play a shaman who is in tune with the spirit world and has a spirit guide with the core rules (without adding class features) or a demonologist whose magic is based around making pacts with summoned demons for long term service in exchange for vile acts from day one with the rules. It is very easy to make these characters with a little houseruling or extra supplements.

 

[MonsterMash]

With 3e no problem whatsoever in fact I prefer it to be limited to the core rules.

 

[JoeyD473]

I am currently playing in a Core rules only campaign. ALthough I havn't said others stuff can't be used

 

[IcyCool]

You also can't play a shaman who is in tune with the spirit world and has a spirit guide with the core rules (without adding class features)

Couldn't this easily be represented with a straight, unmodified druid and animal companion? Speak with animals and Speak with plants covers some of the "spirits", and Speak Language covers the various elemental languages. A spirit guide doesn't have to speak to you, so an ordinary animal companion should suffice there.

Maybe I'm missing something.

 

[howandwhy99]

I'm running/wrestling with a core rules only game right now.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Couldn't this easily be represented with a straight, unmodified druid and animal companion? Speak with animals and Speak with plants covers some of the "spirits", and Speak Language covers the various elemental languages. A spirit guide doesn't have to speak to you, so an ordinary animal companion should suffice there.

Maybe I'm missing something.

It's not a spirit guide if it is neither a spirit (it is a corporeal animal) nor a guide (it doesn't speak to you, or if it does, it's a dumb animal that does not have insights from the spirit world). Then again, it is possible for something to be defined as a two-word term and not fulfill either word (for instance, computer science is neither really a science nor truly about computers), it would just be extremely unsatisfying and not fulfill the vision of the character at all, just the exact phrasing of the term.

 

[IcyCool]

It's not a spirit guide if it is neither a spirit (it is a corporeal animal) nor a guide (it doesn't speak to you, or if it does, it's a dumb animal that does not have insights from the spirit world). Then again, it is possible for something to be defined as a two-word term and not fulfill either word (for instance, computer science is neither really a science nor truly about computers), it would just be extremely unsatisfying and not fulfill the vision of the character at all, just the exact phrasing of the term.

Oh, I just a quick look for a definition and found it equated with Totemism, which was defined as follows:

Totemism (derived from the root -oode in the Ojibwe language, which referred to something kinship-related) is a religious belief that is frequently associated with shamanistic religions. The totem is usually an animal or other naturalistic figure that spiritually represents a person or, more likely, a clan.

I guess that wasn't what you were talking about (I'm sure there are other definitions). I wasn't aware that a spirit had to be non-corporeal for it to count for your definition, but now I know. That being the case, then no, the standard druid doesn't quite work for you. The benefits of a familiar sound a bit closer to that (i.e. it aids another on every skill check and grants some awareness bonuses). You could remove it as a physical creature and call it a "spirit guide". A sorcerer fits that pretty well, then.

I always pictured a spirit guide like they portray in Brotherhood of the Wolf. You know, the animal shows up, maybe leads you to some hidden clue you were looking for, and in the process leads you to a deeper understanding of things, without ever saying a word.

We had a nature worshipping barbarian in one of our campaigns whose tribe worshipped a god of the winds. Whenever she was in need of guidance, she'd ask, "Which way is the wind blowing?", and she'd base her information off of that (Guided by her god). No mechanics necessary. Do you really need mechanics for your concept to be realized?