Search results

Heh. That comparison actually dovetails nicely with the "preferred customer" idea: not only do comic book people buy cheep print products, some of them will buy several copies. The video game market is expanding again. Lots of re-hash content, but that's in-character for D&D. There's still a...

Cleric: Cleric 5 / Radiant Servant of Pelor 10 / Thaumaturgist 5 Wizard: Abjurer 3 / Master Specialist 10 / Initiate of the Seven Veils 7 Rogue: Rogue 1 / Diviner 1 / Drow Paragon 3 / Unseen Seer 10 / Abjurant champion 5 Fighter: The best PrC is "Druid". Take it for 20 levels.

Yeah. I actually don't have a problem with using the same resurrection mechanic, because resurrection ought to be pretty rare in play as compared to healing, and resurrection will tend to happen out of combat so it's not a tactical consideration. One cool thing I recall from 3.5e was the...

One thing I did was to give the Ardent the auras from the Divine Mind (but also I re-wrote them to all use the same scaling, and to be more consistent in terms of power). With the auras, an Ardent was a fine Leader role guy. An idea for that: - Psionic characters can maintain Concentration for...

Well, yeah. The Divine Mind was bad both in background and in implementation. The Dragon Shaman did his thing better. If you use the Ardent as being a philosopher rather than a worshiper, then it can work in a world with (or without) Clerics. Lurk was very limited and very combat-oriented...

Agility and Perceptiveness don't really seem related. Particularly not in a game system where training in perception skill will eventually give you a bigger bonus than focusing on Wisdom.

Hmm. A Psion would have low HP due to being a primary caster, so transferring wounds might be problematic mechanically. In 3.5e that could be worked around with the very efficient Vigor power, but it wasn't exactly intuitive. I'd prefer if the transfer-wounds thing were given to high-HP...

That's an overstatement. There's no evidence that the Cleric of one god must shout down, despise, and claim all other gods as illegitimate. It's more like, two guys see a great idea. Both of them say, "Wow! What a great idea!" Then one guy says, "I'm going to venerate that great idea...

What I think you're saying is that Sorcerers are somehow physically magical, that they have magic in their flesh. Ancestor = bloodline = flesh. "Exposure" = "radiation infusion" = flesh. Demon touching you inappropriately = flesh. Tasting water = industrial pollution = flesh. So, that would...

You like the conversation from page 30, and you want to keep having that conversation. You don't like the conversation which is going on now, so you're insulting new people for not being in the older conversation. Is this... an edition war? About the edition of the thread? It's mildly...

Okay, can you say what it is then? I thought it was having an ancestor, but you say that's wrong, and all I'm seeing by way of explanation is "not like other classes". Perhaps I miscommunicated. All the major 5e spellcasters use spell-slots like a 3.5e Psion used augmentation. Psions can do...

Well, if you demand that every new class gets a unique story, then I'm going to counter-demand that every existing class has a coherent story. We can innovate around stable restrictions, but it's pretty much impossible to innovate around "LOL I DUNNO". Heh. Honestly I could fluff a bunch of...

Yep. Nope, but powers using spell-slots is fine. Nope, sorry. You fail at reading comprehension.

Makes sense to me. Also, the story of the Monk is different from the story of the Sorcerer, even though both might use innate points to power Fire spells from the Wizard's list. So, how do these sound: The Monk uses physical and spiritual training to learn magical techniques. The Sorcerer...

It's called the Wilder. It's called the Erudite. Every caster in 5e uses spell slots or a point mechanic to emulate spell slots. Not sure why you think metamagic is important, are you confusing me with someone who thinks that a Sorcerer can fully replace the Psion? Because that's not me. I...

Well that's fair enough. Being technically correct is the best kind of correct, after all. When I look at the 2e Monstrous Manual, I see stuff like Aboleth, Brain Mole, and Couatl -- all with Psionics sections. In the 1e Monster Manual, most serious fiends had Psionics sections. It's...

Here, I said it last page: Let me know if any of that was difficult to understand, I'd be delighted to clarify. Heh. Nah. It's more like, you didn't notice that the 5e Sorcerer is just a Psion wearing dragon accessories. What did it have other than the flavor (which is easily moved elsewhere)...

Ah. Well, that's what this is about, then. I guess you're trying to recreate 2e? I started with 1e, and played a lot of 3.x and 4e and a tiny bit of 5e, amongst a ton of other game systems. I'm not trying to favor a single edition here -- rather, I'm trying to look at how psionics fit into...

I strongly dislike Trunamer mechanics. They only work if you assume standard wealth-by-level and optimize aggressively around your Truespeak check -- at which point they are balanced against normal, non-optimized characters. I really dislike when a class requires system mastery to not be horrible.

Psionic ESP can be restarted each round for free on a different subject, giving you the same effect as switching targets. Actually, it looks like Psionic ESP just had really terrible game design -- it looks like it can be restarted on the same target every round for free. So 2e had some poor...