Psion said:
And plenty of powers -- including the ones that this thread are about -- aren't. They fail to add side effects, time delays, advantageous targeting rules, or potent save or die effects that higher level powers and effects enjoy.
Of course, which is why I cut the number in half. It's a guesstimate, but I doubt it is highly inaccurate.
Hold on there hoss. I exlicitly only mentioned damage in the example you are talking about. You are not being fair to my point, instead only finding ways to ignore it.
Nope, I just add what you are leaving out, nothing else. Comparing damage only (like Scion does, too) is not meaningful, as it ignores the rest of the picture.
On the gripping hand, at 10th level, the sorcerer or wizard has two spell levels worth of enhancement that they could jazz that spell up with, and they still get 10 dice worth of damage. If the psion wants to jazz the spell up, they have to cut into the points that are paying for the damage dice.
Hey, everyone is aware of this. And if you look closer at my above comparison, you'll find, that even if they do this (full augmentation that is), they still have a respectable number of power manifestations per day! Yes, the sorcerer has more, but 90% of them are weaker in effect than every single one the psion has.
If you take the 15th level and say that a 1st level spell plus a 6th level spell is roughly the same in total effect as a single 8th level power, than do the same for 2nd and 5th and 3rd and 4th (and this is not true, the sum is still weaker *), the number of "totals" are about equal already, the psion has them focused together (not necessarily, just when going for full augmentation always, while the sorcerer has spread them out somewhat - it's not hard to figure which is better in D&D in almost all circumstances, if I need two rounds of casting to have the (roughly) same total effect as another character has in a single round of casting, then I'm definitely weaker)!
* Sidenote: If I had to rate lower level spells against higher level spells, I'd say that one nth level spell is about the same effective total as one (n-1)th level spell PLUS one (n-2)th level spell. This is certainly not true all the time, but overall it should be fairly close. See Mytic Theurge example below for why I think this is pretty close.
Sure, there are some (few) situations, where this splitting is better, but it's not like the psion could not simply split the PP for two different weaker effects, if needed. And given the way their PP expand over the course of the levels, these will be a lot of weaker effects. If those weaker effects would be the only thing you need over the course of the day (which will never be the case for sure), then your comparison might work out and then the sorcerer would come out on top in this area (and this area only, even then still leaving plenty others where the sorcerer lacks behind), since the scaling would still be there, but the augmentation would not work out as well, altho, to be honest, I'm not even sure of this, because of the rate at which the total PP increase adds a lot of effects to the total. But as this (manifesting only low level effects) will basically never be the best possible course of action (as opposed to manifesting only (or at least lots of) high level effects, which will often be useful), it's irrelvant for actual play, anyways.
Almost everyone who plays D&D knows (or should know
), that single high level spells (and a fully augmented power is definitely the equivalent of a high level spell, even if you do not agree about comparing low level scaled spells to low level augmented powers, this one simply cannot be put aside) are better than multiple low level spells!
Remember the Mystic Theurge? Much more spells per day than a sorcerer and all of them are of lower levels. This example shows quite effectively, that the above is most certainly true. While the low level spells are not useless they are simply not as useful as the high level ones and that even if you rack two of those together.
I already amplified that my numbers don't tell the whole story, but yours don't either. And my numbers certainly do have bearing on actual game play.
That is what?
What does it help the sorcerer to have all these damage dice, if they cannot be brought to bear in a situation where it counts?
I didn't say that, did I? Please don't put words in my mouth. My assertion was that, given scribing cost is linear, a wizard has no reason to (and in fact, would be foolish to) stick to scribing low level spells.
Hey, I just exaggerated what you were saying.
And it's not very likely that a wizard can afford a plethora of high level spells to be written, they are not
that cheap. Not without serious drawbacks at least (the opportunity cost of spell scribing).
Hey, once I got the fiendish dire ape, if I was playing the wizard, I wouldn't bother upgrading summon monster for a few levels.
For how many? 1? 2? There are nine levels of that spell and each of them is like twice as good as the one before.
Similarly, if I was decked out on attack spells, I would focus on utility spells for a few levels.
Of course, but can't the psion do this, too? Once he has his *two* attack powers, which cover basically every situation imaginable (slight exaggeration here
), the focus can be shifted on other areas. And 36 powers is a long way to go.
And I beg to differ. I would be surprised if wizards don't DOUBLE the amount of spells/powers that a sorcerer/psion knows.
If you compare single spells to single powers, I don't disagree. If you compare them on a fair base, then this will - while certainly possible - cost them more than half of their complete resources. Not to mention the huge diminishing returns here, since at some point new spells added do not add much content to a spellbook, which should be obvious, hopefully.
Ah, but there is a very simple tactic to be used here that most wizard players know: memorize primarily spells you will need in an instant. Leave spell slots open for utility spells that you will typically not need in an instant.
Yes, and this tactic still reduces the number (and thus breadth) of instantly available spells. It's still probably the best way to go for a wizard, but it's not like it would give them the flexibility of spontaneous casting in a situation where resting simply isn't possible.
As my analysis which you blithely threw out as irrelevant shows that a psion has LESS THAN HALF of the damage dealing capability of the sorcerer before they are exhausted.
Nope, it doesn't show anything. That's why I blithely throw it out as irrelvant. It is.
If you don't compare on a fair level, of course things do not look like they really are.
I have said numerous times (even in the very comparison itself I mentioned it), that sorcerers can cast more spells in a day than psions can manifest powers, but ignoring the potency of these castings/manifestations highly distorts the picture.
You only add in the potency for the sorcerer and ignore pretty much everything for the psion, by just adding up their power points as damage dice. Like the fact how many of those can be brought to bear in a single action and how often this can be done, more often than the sorcerer could ever dream of.
The Mystic Theurge example coming back to mind here.
So the Mystic Theurge is MUCH, MUCH more powerful as a spellcaster, since adding up their spell slots this way is even higher, eh?
Well, let me tell you, that the Mystic Theurge is one of the weakest spellcasters around. Because numbers do not compensate for potency!
Their offense is so weak, that they completely pale in comparison to any single class caster. They are nice for party buffs, since they can waste their spells like noone else, but that's about it.
Yet, if using your method of comparing, they would come out on top for sure (in the damage dealing department), by far even!
So, how does this fit into your picture?
Bye
Thanee
