[Exp.Psionics] New issue of Dragon reveals info. (Now corrected by Bruce C.)

[Derulbaskul]

I'm not so sure I like the idea of Int being the sole ability. I would have been happy with Int= Metacreation and Psychoportation, Wis= Clairsentience and Psychometabolism and Cha = Telepathy and Psychokinesis.

Anyway, I'm glad of one thing: the Str = Psychometabolism (rather than Con) is gone. And, like you, Ash, I hope either psionic combat is removed or a variation of Mindcapes is used.

I must admit, for my upcomign Dawnforge campaign I'll probably use Mindscapes for psionic combat anyway as it seems to suit the setting quite well.

And I am really really looking forward to this book.

 

[tmaaas]

There are players who feel that their $35 for the 1st. ed of d20 Star Wars bought them a "testbed" copy when 2nd edition came out less than two years later and significant changes were made.

I sort of feel the same way about ExpPsi since I've been using If Thoughts Could Kill for a while when I run games.

Unfortunately, my GMs are not very flexible and I have had to PLAY by the old rules. You can sense my frustration.

My view of this scenario is that the first PsiHB was created to the best of WotC's (and Bruce Cordell's) ability at the time. Considering the myriad constraints on the design process, I think it was pretty amazing, even though far from perfect. I don't consider it a "testbed". They published what they considered a finished work.

 

[Nifelhein]

My view of this scenario is that the first PsiHB was created to the best of WotC's (and Bruce Cordell's) ability at the time. Considering the myriad constraints on the design process, I think it was pretty amazing, even though far from perfect. I don't consider it a "testbed". They published what they considered a finished work.

And when they did publish I bought it and liked it, it seemed a step forward from 2nd edition psionics, in my opinion.

But I agree now that it has its limits, but that is what the book is coming for isn't it?

 

[tmaaas]

And when they did publish I bought it and liked it, it seemed a step forward from 2nd edition psionics, in my opinion.

But I agree now that it has its limits, but that is what the book is coming for isn't it?

Yep. I liked the first one, and anticipate liking the second one even more.

It's on my short list of products to get

 

[Nifft]

Even good things evolve. I'm not angry that they didn't get it exactly right the first time, and I'm happy that they're going to do it better this time.

My money will be spent, and it will feel well spent.

-- N

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

About that email...

I sent Bruce a question and posted the response on the other psionics thread on this forum. I don't have Search so I missed this thread, too.

I can ask Bruce Cordell to reply here if no one believes me.

I can definitely see where the complaints about 5d4 Con are coming from ... remember that these are Dragon Magazine powers and are about as balanced as any Dragon Magazine stuff (which is to say if jumps from being really overpowered to really underpowered, and everything in between).

I'm not so sure I like the idea of Int being the sole ability. I would have been happy with Int= Metacreation and Psychoportation, Wis= Clairsentience and Psychometabolism and Cha = Telepathy and Psychokinesis.

I don't think those would be bad house rules. As long as you're staying clear away from physical ability scores I'm not seeing how it's going to break anything.

 

[DonAdam]

I'm not so sure I like the idea of Int being the sole ability. I would have been happy with Int= Metacreation and Psychoportation, Wis= Clairsentience and Psychometabolism and Cha = Telepathy and Psychokinesis.

That's exactly what my group has been doing, actually. I might stay with it, but I'm still glad that there are no more physical psions.

 

[Erratic K]

I just wish the crystal thing would go away.

or I could get an electronic copy so I could switch all the crystal things to something else. I just don't like the crystal thing, it is a flavor thing. Maybe I'm more chocolate than vanilla. I understand this is a personal problem, but everytime I see the crystal thing I think of something like this:

http://www.flinflon.net/postcards/graphics/aquarius.jpg

But from what I've read in this thread, the look of the new rules seems much better compared to the psionic handbook.

The original had two big problems for me that are so far not addressed in this thread regarding the new edition.

a) psionic combat. It was not really their fault as they tried to update a flawed system. But it always felt like a wonky version of Rock Scisors Paper that either had no consequences, or dominated/killed the character.

b) and un-needed complexity. I think they should have used more standard elements of 3rd edition I think, my players had a hard time adapting to psionics and when they did the exploitation of things was ... annoying. Who ever made the comment about "the Frost Giant flexes" was right on, the abuse of the psion class ran wild for a while. I thought it was mind power, not how to get more out of a 25 strength..

I did use it for wild talents though. I made people burn a feat to be a wild talent and would give out 3 uses of 0 level power or one use of a 1st level power for the feat (subject to DM approval). This was pretty popular.

-E

If I was king of WoTC for a day, I would use psionics to satisfy some of the criticisms levelled against the magic system. Present a true alternative... I guess that means include some of the positive elements and embellishments modern RPG's have come up with for magic systems since the OD&D. Give a real alternative:

1) to me that means not vancian (check)
2) correctly scaling spells
3) making more options across levels- there are damage spells at every level but I want disguise/invisibility to have a tree and transportation spells, transformation, and cancellation spells, etc to scale too, damage type substitution options would help cut down the number of direct damage spells (damage substitution is in there).
4) balance, and some throwback flavor. You can make the throwback merely fluff, since the crunch of the original stuff is unbalanced, and the stuff since then hasn't been that great.

 

[hong]

Crystalstorm
Metacreative [Creation]
Psion/ Wilder 3rd

Creates a ray of crystal shards that do 3d4 slashing damage and requires a Fortitude save or suffer 1d4 Constitution damage due to blood loss.

Not this frackin' "blood loss == Con damage" furphy again. So I get cut by some broken glass for 10 points of damage and lose blood. This causes Con damage. But if I get hit by a raging barbarian with a greataxe for 30 points of damage, I somehow must not have lost any blood, because I did not take Con damage. Even when I've been taken down to -9 hit points and am a pile of flesh on the ground, my skin has not been broken. I suppose that's what happens when you use those inferior made-in-Taiwan greataxes.

An okay mechanic, accompanied by craptastic understanding of the D&D model.


Hong "come back Jonathan Tweet, all is forgiven" Ooi

 

[Stalker0]

First of all, you have to hit with a ranged touch attack, then the traget has to fail a save. For 5 PPs you deal 3d4 slashing damage and 1d4 Con damage.

For 7PPs you could deal 4d4 slashing damage and 2d4 Con damage (That's equivalent to a 4th level power.)

For 9PPs you could deal 5d4 slashing damage and 3d4 Con damage (That's equivalent to a 5th level power.)

If it's the Con damage that's got you worried, keep in mind that the 3rd level Druid spell, Poison can possibly do 2d10 Con damage.

At max, you could do 8d4 Con damage at 20th level. Thats pretty harsh, but keep in mind that your ranged touch attack and save DC will not be improving as you augment and you'd have to spend 19 PPs. Compare that to disentegrate or something.

Looks fine to me.

Neutralize poison stops the druid spell in its tracks. Death ward stops all death effects. Con loss is con loss and can kill a lot of characters.