Why Psionics is broken and what to do to fix it

[JonnyFive]

ah ok, i missunderstood. thanks

 

[Psion]

....Whereas for the psion, the argument still rages. That, in and of itself, tells us something significant.

That unlike the warlocks, Psionics has the burden of being known by broken past editions?

That psionics-bashers are simmering inwardly about the "flavor" of psionics and feel the need to manufactur reasons to exclude it on a "balance" level to validate their tastes?

That the closest thing to a psion in the core rules is fundamentally underpowered compared to the other full casters in the game, thus creating an invalid reference point, whereas due to flavor, the warlock benefits by not being directly compared to its closest references (an archer build), which when such a comparison made, it is shown the warlock is potent enough to think twice about its inclusion?

Yeah, those are all good points.

 

[Thanee]

The sorcerer isn't underpowered. He's just misunderstood.

Well, at least you are reasonable enough to see, that the sorcerer and the psion are not on one level (there are people who vehemently argue that they are).

Now you only need to realize that the sorcerer is not significantly weaker than a wizard.

Not that you will ever agree on that, since you very much know about the conclusion.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Marcus Smythe]

The sorcerer isn't underpowered. He's just misunderstood.

Well, at least you are reasonable enough to see, that the sorcerer and the psion are not on one level (there are people who vehemently argue that they are).

Now you only need to realize that the sorcerer is not significantly weaker than a wizard.

Not that you will ever agree on that, since you very much know about the conclusion.

Bye
Thanee

I am... crushed, by the weight of irony inherit in this statement.

State what evidence would be sufficient to indicate to you that Psions are NOT broken? What evidence is necessary to falsify the 'Psionics are Broken' Hypothesis?

Set a standard, give a guideline. I tire of trying to hit the ever-moving target.

 

[Thanee]

If you could (which is impossible IMHO) find evidence, that the sorcerer and the psion class (and the wizard class) are about on one level on the power scale, when under the applied playing style (which can turn a few things upside down here) sorcerers and wizards are about equal.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Marcus Smythe]

If you could (which is impossible IMHO) find evidence, that the sorcerer and the psion class (and the wizard class) are about on one level on the power scale, when under the applied playing style (which can turn a few things upside down here) sorcerers and wizards are about equal.

Bye
Thanee

If your hypothesis is not subject to falsification (which is the only way we will ever move this beyond the realm of 'I think' opinion rants) then we might as well be discussing the nature of God or 'what is the good of man', for as much chance of resolution as we would have. Intellectually stimulating, but not susceptible to proof.

It appears that you will not be playing a psionicist, and noone will be playing a psionicist in a game you or OP run. The first is at most your loss (if you do not like them, no loss) and the second, whoevers loss it may be, is not mine.

 

[Thanee]

If your hypothesis is not subject to falsification (which is the only way we will ever move this beyond the realm of 'I think' opinion rants) then we might as well be discussing the nature of God or 'what is the good of man', for as much chance of resolution as we would have. Intellectually stimulating, but not susceptible to proof.

Hey, you asked what would be sufficient evidence to me, that the Psion class is not broken. I told you that. If you think it's impossible to create such evidence, then you probably realize why I am so strongly convinced of my opinion about this topic.

I'm pretty much 100% convinced, that Sorcerer and Wizard are about equal (unless the playing style favors Wizards in some fashion, which some playing styles surely do); the Sorcerer is maybe a little behind, because of the fewer options they have, but that's well within normal limits.

I'm also 100% convinced, that the Psion is way ahead of the Sorcerer. And this is something most people actually agree with.

It appears that you will not be playing a psionicist, ...

How do you come to that conclusion?

...and noone will be playing a psionicist in a game you or OP run.

That's most likely right, yep. Under the current circumstances, I see absolutely no reason to allow psionics (and thus create a lot of headaches). Flavorwise, which is the only reason to even think about adding them, they are not really needed, psionics can easily be done via spell-like abilities (i.e. MM 3.5 Mind Flayer) and simple flavor text/description.

The first is at most your loss (if you do not like them, no loss) and the second, whoevers loss it may be, is not mine.

Noone's loss, really. Psionics add almost nothing new to a game. There's easily 90+% overlap with existing abilities. They can easily be left out and noone will ever notice the 'lack'.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Marcus Smythe]

Hey, you asked what would be sufficient evidence to me, that the Psion class is not broken. I told you that. If you think it's impossible to create such evidence, then you probably realize why I am so strongly convinced of my opinion about this topic.

I'm pretty much 100% convinced, that Sorcerer and Wizard are about equal (unless the playing style favors Wizards in some fashion, which some playing styles surely do); the Sorcerer is maybe a little behind, because of the fewer options they have, but that's well within normal limits.

I'm also 100% convinced, that the Psion is way ahead of the Sorcerer. And this is something most people actually agree with.



How do you come to that conclusion?



That's most likely right, yep. Under the current circumstances, I see absolutely no reason to allow psionics (and thus create a lot of headaches). Flavorwise, which is the only reason to even think about adding them, they are not really needed, psionics can easily be done via spell-like abilities (i.e. MM 3.5 Mind Flayer) and simple flavor text/description.



Noone's loss, really. Psionics add almost nothing new to a game. There's easily 90+% overlap with existing abilities. They can easily be left out and noone will ever notice the 'lack'.

Bye
Thanee

The impossibility inherit in the evidence requested is the ill-defined nature of what is desired.

Provide a precise definition of what your looking for, and I'll try to give it a shot.

 

[Dwarmaj]

Noone's loss, really. Psionics add almost nothing new to a game. There's easily 90+% overlap with existing abilities. They can easily be left out and noone will ever notice the 'lack'.

That's pretty harsh. I guess we really don't need anything but the core PC types either.

Sounds like someone's wizard got beat up by a psion when they were a kid...

Yes, Psionics does have some powers that are better than arcane/divine spells. There are many more spells that are better than powers.

Every issue that has been brought up as to why psionics are broken have been addresses and either dismissed or ignored.

One power can do many things... Psion get fewer powers known. 3.0 psionics didn't have this, but psions had more powers then too. There are Energy Substitution feats if a mage really wants to change enegry types. There's also PrCs that grant this ability. If psions have to burn feats to get cross disipline powers, why shouldn't a wizard need to burn a feat to do some things.

A 1st level power can do 20d6 at 20th level... Psionic powers don't autoscale and they have to use more resources to increase their damage output.

The only real issue with psionics is the extra actions that can be gained and can also be limited by the DM if it becomes a problem.

Again, being different does not mean it's broken.

 

[Thanee]

The impossibility inherit in the evidence requested is the ill-defined nature of what is desired.

Provide a precise definition of what your looking for, and I'll try to give it a shot.

Uhm... how much more precise can it get?

I guess your 'precise' is not the 'precise' I know.

Bye
Thanee