For Nail - The Psion

[Shadowdweller]

The conclusion of a comparison (with feats and specialized or without feats and not specialized) is obvious; A-C is over-powered as written. Add in the fact that psions can do twice to three times as many high level A-C in a day than a regular spell caster, and you've got a whole truck-load of wacked.

While I realize that this issue has been brought up ad nauseum, I'm still a little hazy on your reasoning here (or in disagreement):

Going under the assumption that somehow we've proven A-C more powerful than SM beyond a shadow of a doubt, how does this make A-C inherently overpowered?

Experiencewise: While I confess I tend to play in vastly greater numbers of low-level games, I've yet to see ANY summoner (or constructor or what have you), with the exception of high-level arcanists using Gate, dominate combat/play to a degree where it was in any sense detracting from the niche or enjoyment of other players.

Edit: Hrm. Actually in retrospect, though that last part still stands it's probably because my acquaintances have been reluctant to use Planar Ally/Binding. I've experienced a little bit of grotesquerie there.

 

[Nail]

@shadowdweller:

Different groups really do put different emphasis' on different sets of powers. If my "arguement" has any fundamental flaw, it's there. Some groups simply don't use SM, or have never seen 2 specialists (SM and A-C) compete. It's hard to judge what you haven't yourself witnessed.

In KarinsDad's game, for example, it seems as if practically every full round casting time spell gets disrupted. In my games, it's a rare occurance. (Shrugs)

To go to your core question: "Assume A-C is more powerful than SM ; how does this make A-C inherently overpowered?"

I would answer: Two similar abilities should be similar in power. SM is balanced wrt other spells and class abilities within the core rules. A-C is far more powerful than SM, yet fills the same role. This is a problem, and detracts from fun.

 

[Nail]

If everyone is having fun, though, perhaps its best to just go with the flow, accept that the psion's player "has won", and just keep throwing more and more entertaining and unbelievable encounters for the party to overcome.

That's our plan.

The poor Wiz 15, though! When I DMed, I threw at the party all this stuff tailored for the Psion...and, unfortunately, they were really good a beating up Wizards too. Ouch!!!

 

[Scion]

Well, I had this nice post almost done, and then the power went out. Very
annoying ;/ I'll try to redo it but if it comes off a bit brief that would
be the reason why.

I dont have a ton of time, I'll go over the highlights across a few posts.
Hopefully no one will mind me posting a few in a row

(gah, this post turned out way too long )

Here is the first part of my examination of the game
mechanics in the XPH. The second part will look at psionic powers
specifically, if I get the time.
My essential conclusion: Psionic spellcasting is unbalanced as against spellcasting by divine and arcane spellcasters as presented in the core rules. The XPH is a power up D&D supplement, much like the "Complete" series.

I would like to see you do a similar analysis of arcane and of divine in two seperate runs. If you were to do them in the same way you did this one then your conclusions on each that they are unbalanced as compared to each of the others.

Even if one could prove that most of the time manifestors are stronger/better/more potent than arcane casters they are still below the power level of the divine casters. I do find it interesting that being below the power level of one or more of the core guys is written off as unimportant while at the same time anything that they might be good at is blown way out of proportion.

D&D v.3.x incorporates some fundamental design philosophies which need to be borne in mind when assessing the integrity of any new rules or design options. The primary design philosophy is simple – D&D is a tactical wargame. You can LARP it up all you want, but at the end of the day, the RAW only support a tactical wargame. Everything else is a necessary byproduct of individuals’ playing styles. What flows from this conclusion is that the RAW must assume that players will optimise their choices within the ruleset to gain maximum advantage for their characters.

Furthermore, the RAW must not assume that there will be any balance to this optimisation by individuals’ (DMs’ or players’) playing style.

Now, going along with this, I personally hate having to always play to the lowest common denomenator. It is neither necissary nor required. There are other ways around certain problems after all, many systems do this. But, this is neither here nor there.

Coming at this from another way, if we go by what is easiest to min/max and to what degree we could look to the character optimization boards. The number of builds for caster types and noncaster types are far above and beyond the numbers for psionic builds. Generally there are a few things that can be worked hard to get obscene in the psionics system, but there are far, far more for the other caster types. So, by this yard stick, psioncs would be in need of some beefing up, not nerfing (or, the other caster types would need some nerfing, to be brought down to the appropriate level).

Within this context, let’s examine a number of features of the Expanded Psionics Handbook (XPH) against the SRD.

Power points vs Vancian spellcasting

The XPH introduces a system of spellcasting which departs from the system presented in the SRD. Let’s not pretend that psionics is not just another spellcasting system.

I was following along until the last line there. We dont have to pretend that psionics is just another spellcasting system because it 'is' just another spellcasting system. It works in the same way, it does the samethings. Really, it has spell (power) levels, it is effected by SR, it deals with limitations of duration in the same fashion, dispel magic works, it doesnt function in an antimagic field, and a number of other things.

Transparency across the board.

Maybe in 2nd edition you could've made a case, but in 3rd? Not a chance.

In the following discussion, I will talk about “degrees of freedom” and “degrees of limitation” in spellcasting. Essentially, I’m talking about the flexibility inherent in a particular form of spellcasting.

There are four degrees of limitation and freedom:
· spells accessible: what spells a character can potentially draw upon;
· spells prepared: what spells a character can actually draw upon during a day;
· spells per day: how many spells a character can cast in a day; and
· spells per level: the composition, by level, of the spells a character can cast in a day.

Interesting. Are all of these rated equally? How do you rate these by degrees that they go to. After all, taking it to an extreme, if one can only choose between 3 spells from each level, only gets one of these three, can only cast it once per day, but they all have durations of 24 hours and are very impressive. This could easily be balanced by the system at large but going by the above it would be completely impossible to tell.

Maybe if you had a rating system from 1 to 5 or so. of course, at that point there is a problem of which value to pick. The conclusions drawn would likewise be biased. However, it would at least give a slightly better starting place than this.

Vancian spellcasting for divine classes is characterised by three degrees of limitation: spells prepared, spells per day, and spells per level; and one degree of freedom: spells accessible.

Vancian spellcasting for wizards is characterised by four degrees of limitation: spells accessible, spells prepared, spells per day, and spells per level. While it is true that a wizard can theoretically have all sorcerer/wizard spells in their spellbooks, as a practical matter this is impossible. Hence, in practice, spells accessible is a degree of limitation for wizards, although relatively less of a limitation than that faced by spontaneous spellcasters.

Spontaneous spellcasting is characterised by three degrees of limitation:
spells accessible, spells per day, and spells per level; and one degree of freedom: spells prepared.

I note that there are other variations on the degrees of limitation and freedom for spellcasters which have been presented in supplements, notably through the alternative core classes in Complete Divine and Complete Arcane. This analysis can be used to decide whether those systems are balanced with the systems in the SRD, but I don’t propose to do so. I’m just looking at the XPH.

It sounds like you are saying that the wizard and sorcerer suck. But, as I mentioned above, there are just so many variables that are left out that it is impossible to tell.

In other words, one could draw any number of different interpretations from this and they would all be equally valid.

Even just by going directly with what I think you are trying to say basically you put the sorc way above the wizard in power level and possibly even above the divine caster although it is fuzzy.

Psionic spellcasting is characterised by two degrees of limitation: spells accessible and spells per day; and two degrees of freedom: spells prepared and spells per level.

Spells per level? The sorc should get this one as well if the psion gets it. Especially considering that the sorc is the master of metamagics, far and above the psion.

yet another thing saying that the sorc is actually way ahead in this game

Firstly, it should be noted that psionic spellcasting has more degrees of freedom (and consequently fewer degrees of limitation) than the spellcasting options presented in the SRD.

Actually, I dont feel this is true. You toss away the wizards best advantage as a trifle (given any situation and time to prepare he will have an answer, massive selection) and give beanies to the psions side without giving the same beanie to the sorc when he deserves it. To my counting that puts the sorc and psion on decently even ground and the wizard only slightly behind.

Going even further, if we look at a specialist wizard instead (psions are specialists, so comparing to a specialist wizard certainly shouldnt be out of line) the wizard has nearly as many spells to cast in a day as the sorc, and way above the psion. Another point of contention.

The spells per level degree of freedom is often manifested in the observation that “psions can use their highest level powers [i.e. cast their highest level spells] until their power points run out”. Since all power points [= spell points] form one universal resource from which to cast spells (the power point pool), psionic spellcasters are not bound to limit their spellcasting to fixed numbers of spells of certain levels.

Although the SRD spellcasters have the flexibility to use a spell slot of a given level for a spell of a lower level, SRD spellcasters cannot combine spell slots of lower levels to cast higher level spells.

Of course, if we add up the pp value of each spell the casters have they are pretty far ahead of the psion. This means that the psion has more flexibility but less staying power. This is a tradeoff that many like to sweep under the rug.

Many lower level spells and powers retain their usefulness later on. The casters are mostly free to act on these, they dont really count much against their overall power. Each and every power manifested cuts into the 'advantage' that others always point to. In addition, going full out like that isnt all that much more effective than what the other casters can do generally, then the psions have to be out of the game for longer.

So, tradeoffs. The potential to do more highers, but doing no lowers. Or, lots of lowers but no real highers. Overall, much less staying power in trade for the versitility.

Remember that ranking system I said above?

Secondly, psionic spellcasters are more easily able to reduce the impact of the spells accessible degree of limitation than SRD spellcasters because psionic spells often duplicate the effects of multiple SRD spells through augmentation.

This is true, it is another aspect of what I said above. Although, there is also the point of free augmentation for some spells that powers dont get.

There are also a very large number of spells vs the number of psionic powers, although this is a difficult point to call 'balancing'. Although, it does mean that there are a large number of unique effects that the psions simply cannot do.

A comparison of spellcasting by sorcerers, wizards and psions

If one converts sorcerers and wizard spells per day into spell points, and compares them to the spell points possessed by a psion, at all but the lowest class levels:
· a sorcerer has more spell points than a psion; and
· a psion has more spell points than a wizard.

More of these items without scales. But, I just so happened to have made one

(0's count as half, specialist in parenthesis, psion in brackets, sorc last)
1st 2.5 (3) [2] {5.5}
2nd 4 (5) [6] {7}
3rd 7 (11) [11] {8}
4th 11 (15) [17] {18}
5th 16 (25) [25] {21}
6th 24 (32) [35] {39}
7th 32 (48) [46] {47}
8th 44 (60) [58] {73}
9th 56 (81) [72] {85}
10th 72 (97) [88] {119}
11th 88 (124) [106] {135}
12th 108 (144) [126] {179}
13th 128 (177) [147] {199}
14th 152 (201) [170] {249}
15th 176 (240) [195] {273}
16th 204 (268) [221] {331}
17th 232 (313) [250] {359}
18th 264 (345) [280] {425}
19th 294 (375) [311] {457}
20th 326 (407) [343] {491}

now, I dont know how to make one of those nifty table things. If anyone can let me know I'll try it.

Now, the generalist mage is always on the bottom, but generally not by much.

The bonus points run the gambit varying by level and ability modifier for which class gets the most.

Overall, the generalist wizard is on the bottom, then the psion, then the specialist wizard, then the sorc on the top.

But then consider the following:
· a psion knows more spells per level (with the exception of 0-2nd level spells at higher class levels) than a sorcerer; and
· a psion acquires his highest level spells one class level earlier than a sorcerer (and the same level as a wizard).

As the psion has to spend first level slots to get the equivalents of the 0th level spells I think this is definately a consideration, especially early on. The psion must also spend a full pp for them instead of the 1/2 as they were rated above.

I have no clue at all why the sorc has delayed progression. Going by the numbers I just gave it looks like giving the sorc a 1 instead of a dash at the appropriate odd levels would make the progression in pp equivalncies work out perfectly across the board. Sounds like a sorc problem, not a psion problem.

Then there are other aspects to the psion and psionic spellcasting which cannot be overlooked:
· a psion gains bonus feats like a wizard;
· a psion can cast any spell at a higher caster level than he has class levels or character levels, through the Overchannel feat, an ability which is barred to arcane spellcasters. The negative effects of Overchannel can be mitigated with another feat, Talented.

The first is a given. The only negative comparison this could be taken as is vs the sorc. Again, sorc problem, not a psion problem. Same with the sorc being cha based which could be considered to be a detriment. Sorc problem, not a psion problem. Unless of course you are taking away bonus feats from the wizard and domains from the cleric.

The second is spending feats for some special purpose. yes, there are some psionic feats for which there is no magic equivalent, the same is true for the reverse. Given the number of suppliments out we can get a huge ratio of feats that the arcane can use that the psions cant. Which would mean that your point actually goes for saying the psion is weaker than the others.

Also, for the last bit, talented only works with powers of level 3 and less (that would be: 1st, 2nd and 3rd as there are no 0th level powers) and requires expending focus. I notice from the rest of your analysis you ignore this factor. It is a 'huge' factor, so huge that ignoring it is enough to throw our your entire analysis without even bothering to read the rest. Focus is a huge balancing factor.

I'll go over this more later, but I'll give a brief example. Say your caster wants to have a spell focused, spell penetrating, and empowered spell. The psion, pre-epic, can 'never' do this. Even after spending a bunch of feats the best that he can do is two foci at once, and if he wants to do that more than once per combat it takes rounds of extra time (even with spending yet another feat to reduce the time it takes to regain focus).

But still, yes, the psion can use overchannel and sometimes ignore the damage by expending focus, and then could spend even more pp out of their limited supply to make some power a little more impressive. That is one of their perks. If you would like me to list out a few dozen feats that the psion cant use that the other casters can I will.

Psionicists are not affected by physical limitations

SRD arcane spellcasters suffer considerable physical limitations on their spellcasting abilities. These fall into two classes:
· arcane failure chance from armour; and
· spell components.

Although originally part of D&D as “flavour”, in v.3.x these limitations take on the nature of rules-related balancing factors.

Arcane spell failure from armour is probably only a minor balancing factor, but spell components are big limitations in practice.

Arcane spell failure is stupid. But even failing that, divine casters are not effected. Failing that not all arcane casters are effected all of the time. Failing that, not all spells have somatic components. Even failing all of that even a wizard can cast spells with somatic components in armor if he chooses his equipment properly.

Definately a minor balancing point, and one that shouldnt even be there in the first place in my opinion.

The psion isnt exactly proficient in armor anyway, so still suffers from skill check penalties, which is very prohibiting.

Material components almost never come into play. Most are ignored completely with a spell pouch (incredibly cheap, having multiple doesnt even effect your total wealth) and even with the expensive ones I would much rather have a focus/component instead of having to pay exp.

Since casting of psionic spells is a purely mental affair, psionic spellcasters suffer no such limitations. There are no “Silent Power” and “Still Power” feats in the XPH. There’s no “Eschew Materials” feat for psionicists.

True, the psions dont have V, S, or M, they have a completely different set of limitations. Like a ringing in peoples ears or being covered in slime. So, the part about, 'no such limitations' is effectively false, nice try though.

Psionic spellcasters don’t require spellbooks, so can neither suffer from a loss of spells accessible, nor pay any money for maintenance of spells accessible.

Wizards have a huge selection of spells available as compared with the psion. Wizards need a book to look over, from which they can fill up slots anytime during the day, and the psion has a much more limited selection.

Psionic spellcasters are obviously at an advantage here.

In some ways yes, in other ways no. Unfortunately, the game works with whole numbers so feats that would be '+0.1' must be rounded up to 1. I am hopeing for fixes sometime in the future

Augmentation increases flexibility

Many psionic powers have variable effects which are dependent upon the power points spent on them – a process called augmentation. Let’s be clear – I consider this to be a good design characteristic. However, it actually provides greater flexibility to psionic spellcasters than SRD spellcasters who are labouring under the yoke of fixed spell effects or “blessed” with spells which are “freely scalable”.

Augmentation is a very nice addition. I feel it adds a lot of flavor to the class.

But yes, the casters get free scaling in many spells that the psion must pay for directly.

However, I disagree with the 'greater flexibility' comment. It definately adds a lot, but there are still so many things in magic that work over such a wide area of effect along with the always scaling that it simply means that in specific situations certain powers have a greater flexibility.

The benefit of augmentation is that it results in the need for fewer psionic spells to accomplish the same result as multiple SRD spells. An example is astral construct, which is the equivalent of 9 summon monster or 9 summon nature’s ally spells; it’s effective spell level is entirely dependent upon the number of power points the psionic spellcaster wishes to expend in manifesting [= casting] it. Similarly for psionic charm and psionic dominate, each of which replaces two SRD spells (charm/dominate person and charm/dominate monster). Thus, the spells accessible degree of limitation for psionic spellcasters is relatively less of a limitation than the spells accessible degree of limitation for arcane SRD spellcasters. What sorcerer wouldn’t give his right arm to know one spell which enables him to summon every monster from the nine tables of summon monster spells?

Even wizards, whose spells accessible degree of limitation is relatively less limiting than that under which the spontaneous spellcasters labour would benefit greatly from such flexibility – as in the situation you thought you would be negotiating with humanoids so prepared charm person, and then you find out you’re dealing with humanoid-looking outsiders and your charm monster languishes uselessly unprepared in your spellbook. To say nothing of the amount of money the wizard would save by not having to scribe multiple similar spells into his spellbook.

Lets look at this in some steps.

First of all, about the psionic dominate, it is telepath only and it starts off weaker than the spell version. Astral construct and summon monster have very different options, you can get lots of things from summoning that you cant dream of with the construct, and you can get more guys at once, and astral construct is shaper only.

Talking about 'degrees of freedom' though there are many good powers only on certain discipline lists. If you want to even get a handfull of them there go all of those vaunted feats, putting the psion farther behind the wizard.

Secondly, you are again ignoring the benefit of the spellbook, along with ignoring the wizards powerful ability to leave slots open to get the perfect spell later.

There is another benefit to augmentation which is not present in freely scalabe SRD spells – harm minimisation. Psionicists can “pull their punches” by casting psionic spells at base power point cost; they are not “forced” into augmenting their spells by the game mechanics. A fireball cast by a 10th-level wizard will always cause 10d6 points of damage; a psion can manifest an energy ball which only does 7d6 points of damage (and can reduce this to 7d6-7 damage if he chooses sonic damage). Although I concede this is not a particularly significant unbalancing factor, there are times when a spellcaster will want to “pull his punches”, and the fact that psionic spellcasters can do so while SRD spellcasters can’t is simply another example of how the XPH has not done a good job at balancing out a spell point pool spellcasting system with a Vancian spellcasting system.

We are apparently not playing the same game, casters can freely choose a number all the way down to the minimum needed to cast the spell

The myth that psionic powers aren’t “freely scalable”

The allegation that psionic spells are freely scalable is entirely an allegation about certain effects of the spells. Where range and duration of psionic spells are variable, then just like SRD spells, the range and duration of psionic spells scale freely with caster level.

Furthermore, there are numerous psionic powers whose effects are freely scalable – see, for example, energy adaptation and the various spell-equivalent psychoportation powers (psionic dimension door, psionic teleport etc.). These are not isolated examples.

yep, some powers do scale. Not all do however. There are several powers whos augmentation is so horrible as to make them effectively worthless also (disentegrate anyone?), this cuts into other areas of ability.

The trouble with power points by spell level

The number of power points a psionic spells costs to cast is equivalent to (2 x spell level) –1. This is a linear arithmetic progression. Thus, the difference between each spell level as a ratio of one spell level to the next reduces as the spell levels increase. It is 3 times more expensive to cast a 2nd-level psionic spell as a 1st-level psionic spell, but only 1.13 times more expensive to cast a 9th-level psionic spell as an 8th-level psionic spell.

If one assumes that the pricing of psionic spells by level actually represents their relative mechanical value, then this system is balanced.

However, my personal opinion is that the higher the spell level we’re looking at, the more under-priced it becomes compared to spells of lower levels. Is it true to say that a single 9th-level spell is worth less, mechanically speaking, than six 2nd-level spells? My personal conception of the relative value of spells involves a geometric progression of values – each spell level is (for example) 2 times more valuable than the preceding spell level. (1st-level = 1 power point, 2nd-level = 2, 3rd level = 4, 4th-level = 8, 5th-level = 16, etc.)

Eh, I feel that the linear progression is fine for the difference in power levels. Higher multipliers are definately out of the question.

If in fact a 9th-level psionic spell is 2 times more mechanically valuable than an 8th-level psionic spell

But then, it isnt, so you dont have to worry about this.

If you want to judge by dice of damage then each new level is only slightly above the last. If you want to judge by other requirements feel free to list them.

Essentially, for psionic spellcasters, 9th-level spells are “crazy, crazy bargain-basement specials” compared to 1st-level spells.

Do you mean like sorcs and their scorching rays and magic missiles which blow the psions low level stuff out of the water on a cost to cost balance?

Again, sounds like the psion is behind..lol


Each level of spell/power is definately not necissarily double the power of the last. In fact, I would say it is very, very far from it. Definately an increase, but quadratic? No way. Linear is as good an approximation as anything else that doesnt go up too fast.

Still though, spending more ability at once should do slightly more effective things. Strangely enough, that is exactly what happens.

Comments on some psionic skills

Autohypnosis: A handy skill which should be available as a class skill for non-psionic character classes, in particular, monks. I see no reason why clerics and druids, who might very well be prone to enter long meditative trances, might not also have this skill as a class skill.

Cool, so give it to them. They can already take it crossclassed anyway.

Dont make up problems that dont even exist to begin with. Of course, I feel that every class should have spot and listen on their class lists. That doesnt mean that it happens though.

Concentration and the psionic focus: Expenditure of the psionic focus “powers” many psionic feats and psionic spells. An interesting mechanic which appears to have little actual purpose. Psionic feats and spells can be made directly equivalent to SRD feats and spells, and the mechanical application of psionic feats can be made directly equivalent to the mechanical application of SRD feats.

Focus is a major drawback to being a psionic character. It limits pretty much everything that they can do in one way or another. Sure, the feats could be made equivalent, but it is nice for some extra flavor.

My guess would be that it was also put in to help against some of the detractors saying psionics were too powerful. I guess it failed, at least in some cases.

But psionic focus is actually just a balancing game mechanic given flavour by sounding all “psionic”. It purports to be a way of balancing psionic feats and some powers, so that they can’t be used every round and there is a chance you won’t be able to access them at all (because you can’t make your DC 20 Concentration check). But the XPH provides for ways to circumvent this balance, for example, feats which enable the gaining of the focus a move action and give you a +4 on your Concentration check, and powers which enable you to regain your focus essentially for free (temporal acceleration). Balancing of psionic feats can be accomplished without using this mechanic – for example, simply by the feat description limiting uses per day, uses per round, or “stacking” of feats. So why create this concept at all? It is elegant game design. But then make sure you don’t undermine the balancing aspects of the mechanic.

I dont even know where to start here. Apparently everyone has an unlimited number of feats, pp, and time. Must be nice, I've never played in a game like that however.

If you want to be able to use your psionic feats more than once in a given battle (aside from spending a full round doing nothing else but trying to gain focus) you must spend another feat, you must max out concentration all of the time, you must spend time regaining focus.

Limited uses per day is a horrible balancing mechanic (see the spontaneous metamagic feats and other such problems). I dont know what you mean by, 'limited uses per round', nor 'stacking'.

the concept works pretty well in practice, although it has some issues. Such as the feat that makes it a move action should be dropped into concentration checks. Too many feats are required to make useing focus something that any psion can do. Major balancing point, too major in fact.

Comments on some metapsionic feats

Sidebar on page 40: This sidebar says, “Trust us, we know what we’re doing”. Given what I’ve said above, I’m personally not convinced…

Given what you have said above I think you should trust in them much more than you trust in your analysis.

Boost Construct: Augment Summoning for psionicists, without the useless feat prerequisite (Spell Focus (conjuration) is a useless feat because few conjuration spells have saving throws). Put in a useless feat prerequisite to balance it.

Why? Why not just remove the requirement from augment summoning?

Empower Power: Increases power point expenditure by 2, which equals one spell level. Of course, Empower Spell increases the spell level of the subject spell by 2 levels (which would be 4 power points). But because of the free scaling nature of the variable numeric effects of SRD spells, Empowering is generally more attractive for SRD spellcasters. But psionicists can cause more damage (if they want to spend the power points) because psionic spells have no damage caps; an Empowered fireball can only ever do a maximum of 10d6 x 1.5 points of damage (avg 52.5), whereas an Empowered energy ball can do (manifester level – 1) x (1d6+1) x 1.5 points of fire or cold damage (avg 128.25 spending 20 power points at 20th level). [Direct damage psionic spells continue to be useful at high levels, whereas direct damage SRD spells decline rapidly in usefulness.]

So are you saying that the psions are getting the shaft or that they are even?

Empower power needs expenditure of focus (remember focus?) and in order to make it useful the psion has to dump a lot more pp into a power than the spellcaster does for a spell.

Of course, the caster has the metamagic rods and can dump out a few empowered ones for pretty cheap (9k for a lesser rod, turn those 10d6 fireballs into 15d6, still only a third level spell).

Direct damage psionic powers do tend to still be useful later on, moreso than the spells, but the psion pays for it. Also, it isnt because of the damage (which is compareable), it is only because the psion can change elements. Without that they would be just as bad at it as the other casters.

Psions are better blasters, nothing wrong with that, at all. (and by 'better' I mean 'actually viable')

Enlarge Power: No power point cost for applying this feat to a psionic spell; c.f. Enlarge Spell. The “balancing factor” is that the psionicist must expend his psionic focus, which means that the feat can only be used every second round (and the psionicist is only Concentrating every second round) or can only be used every round if the psionicist is not moving and has the Psionic Meditation feat (which all psions certainly will).

Every psion will get it? Wow, cutting into those bonus feats even further. Along with maybe provoking aoos, needing to make the check, and having to wait until level 5 to get it.

Still though, are you saying that they are fairly even or that one of them is ahead of the other?

Power Penetration and Greater Power Penetration: Spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration for psionic spellcasters, but granting twice the bonuses. This is a double-benefit for psionic spellcasters, given psionics-magic transparency. Psionic spellcasters are better at affecting spell-resistant creatures than SRD spellcasters. Why? (“But you have to expend your psionic focus, and that balances it!” How about removing psionic focus from these feats completely and dropping their bonuses to +2 and +4 – that balances them).

They wanted a different effect ::shrugs::. Personally, I would much rather have it be +2 without focus. As is this is a much, much weaker version for psionics than casters, even with the doubling.

Since the caster version is always on you dont have to worry about whether or not the creature has SR, you always get it. For the psion they have to worry and guess, if they go with the extra then they cant do something else. Plus, it requires the psion to get psychic meditation and most likely also psicrystal and psicrystal containment just so that they can actually get use out of their feats.

Overchannel and Talented: This feat allows the psionic spellcaster to break the maximum power point limit, at the cost of some hit points. This allows, for example, augmentation of powers which the psionic spellcaster could not normally augment, and the application of metapsionic feats to psionic spells which the spellcaster could not normally apply. Talented reduces the hit point cost of overchanneling. There is no SRD spellcaster equivalent.

I went over this above. Basically it is a nice combo that takes a lot of resources to pull off and has some restrictions in order to be better at what the psion does.

However, there are so many different feats that the psion cant use that the caster can that the last arguement is completely meaningless.

(actually, practiced spellcaster is similar in some ways..psionics dont have an equivalent that I have seen, although one could port it directly through transperency, but psions get less out of the feat than casters)

Psionic Body: Can you imagine the following feat: “Every metamagic or item creation feat you have you gain 2 hit points”. For a wizard with d4 hit points per level, not an unattractive feat methinks.

Please, improved toughness is 'way' better than this feat. In addition, it can be argued that 'dodge' is a better feat than improved toughness (ignoring 1 out of every 20 attacks vs an opponent every combat), so that shows how low on the pecking order this feat is.

The main benefit is that at early levels the psion can have more surviveability through the sacrifice, and that is it.

Unconditional Power: Obviously, a self-defence feat (“I’ll dimension door/teleport/dispel magic myself out of this mess”), with a high power point cost. But no SRD spellcaster equivalent.

Talk about a, 'almost always worthless but can come in handy in a pinch' feat. 'Huge' cost and very conditional.

Anyway though, in conclusion I think your conclusion is fairly suspect. I think that if you did a similar analysis of the arcane magic and of divine magic they would all have the same final analysis. Each can do things the others cant, each has their own specialties, and each can be said to be unbalanced when important factors are brushed away.

 

[Scion]

Okey-dokey. But first lemme respond to this mistake:

I needed Spell focus(conjuration) for the Augment summoning feat. Looks a heck of a lot more like 3 feats spent.

Since I was counting only things that benefited the summoner for summoning it wasnt a mistake. But, I can see how you would misunderstand my comment.

So, he spent a feat on 'augmented summoning'. That is one feat.

The next feat was to turn turning attempts into faster summons (this is an incredibly powerful ability, as I said before I think this right here puts your guys above the power level of the constructs hands down).

So, that is two feats. One of which is equivalent to a C ability for all of your summons and the other is incredibly powerful right off of the bat. Very powerful stuff here.

That's more than the psion needs to....and the psion can use Overchannel for other things. And I'd love you to try to argue that the Spell focus(conjuration) is useful.

Sounds like you are assuming that the psion spends 3 feats at least: Overchannel, talented, and boost construct.

To use talented the psion must expend focus, so in order to do this more than once per combat he also needs psychic meditation and a whole pile of ranks in concentration.

The psion gets a tougher guy with his feats (if he spends extra pp in addition) and your guy comes out extra fast (assuming you dump a turning attempt or two into it).

Losing pp faster means the psion is out of the game faster, losing turning attempts doesnt really mean much to the cleric. Especially this cleric who apparently gets a ton of turning attempts from all over..lol

Anyway, here's the Q&A about my Clr 15:

Ok

The domain was originally from DorF, now updated to CD. It boosts my caster level with those spells by +2. This is a rather minor benefit, all things considered. It also makes many (but not all) summon monster spells domain spells. That's kinda nifty...see Domain Sponteniety.

+2 caster level means it is harder to dispel and lasts longer, for every summon you pop out, without further cost. If it is a 'minor benefit' then you apparently never played low level, never try to use summons outside of combat, never have people use dispels, and/or never try to use noncombatant summons (when the summon goes away spell effects do too, keeping him around longer means they last longer).

Also, it gives you more chances to use summon monster each day.

The cleric has a similar conversion to spell points as the sorc when domains are counted in. This means that the cleric can bring many, many more summons into play than the psion can. If the psion is useing overchannel often then this number jumps up greatly again.

Not even close. No way. Uh-uh...ain't gonna buy it. A +4 Str/+4 Con is equivalent to the Menu C choices?? Don't forget: with the Boost Construct feat, the psion may pick 2 options from menu C.

And you and I both know there's nothing weird about comparing A-C and SM. Stop "blowing smoke".

I am not the one blowing smoke here, but a lot of other people are. Jumping back and forth and picking up on discussions with others and then making up strawmen.. but it happens all of the time when psionics come up. People are so unwilling to try anything and so ready to pick up on anything negative that it is nearly impossible to get anything in edge wise.

But that is a distraction, lets go over this.

Muscle is a +4 to strength menu B ability. One can trade in a menu C ability for 2 menu B abilities. Augmented summoning gives +4 str and +4 con all of the time to all summons. This sounds like the equivalent to a menu C ability to me. Easily twice as good as the menu B ability.

Also, the boost construct only gives a menu C choice for constructs of level 7 and up, for anyone less it gives a lesser choice.

If you disagree that augmented summoning isnt equivalent to a menu C choice feel free to point out why, I think my reasoning above works very well for the conversion you want to do.

But then, I still see no point at all in trying to compare them purely in situations where the AC's were meant to excel, just like earlier when I made the example of cone of cold doing much less fire damage than fireball and therefor cone of cold was horribly underpowered. The comparison is more extreme, but along exactly the same lines.

That is to say: it allows him to do something the psion gets to do for free. Yep, it allows me to be closer to the psion's power level.

The feat is in CD.

It allows the cleric to blow the psion out of the water for amount of uses of summon monster. He can have whatever of his incredibly large list already known and subsitute them out at will.

This is 'huge' for the cleric. Your cleric started at about the same power level and you blasted the psion away so long ago there isnt even a competition anymore.

As it was a house-rule, I thought posting it wasn't appropriate, so I just described it generally. But yes: you got the idea.

Not appropriate to post something you are useing as a basis and that is not protected by any laws? I am confused.

I will assume for now that it is 1 turn attempt to make it a standard action. Even if nothing else was done on any other level I think this right here would pass up the power level of the AC immediately.

It is just an incredibly large advantage.

After all, these SM are often meat-shields.

I think this is your biggest problem right here.

If you step up to a specialist in his zone of interest and he has given up resources to be better at it then a nonspecialist, half gimped character should lose 100% of the time.

You have gone through pains to make your guy a specialist, so that gets rid of the nonspecialist part.

Still though, with what you have described your guy is a powerhouse that the psion can only compete with in a narrow band. Given that, he had better still win, considering. I dont see how he would though except in very specific situations.

If you still think that, there's a problem. Look through some of the pure SM threads, if yer interested.

If you do not think that, then there is a problem.

Your guy starts off with only about half of the list to begin with. That is a pretty big hinderance. It really cuts into its versitility. Hence, your character starts off very, very bad at useing it but you are forcing it to be viable.

You have done a good job of that, in fact over the course of short combats your guy should do better nearly 100% of the time because of a single feat you have, even if it was the only thing you used.

The Summon Monster/Summon Natures Ally tactic is good. (Ask my players when I DM!) Even without the feats and PrC. Even at higher levels.

It is 'a' tactic and it can be useful when used properly, but meat shield it does not do very well. It has a lot of versitility and a ton of options which the AC has no hope to ever get.

Without any feats or prc's helping it out it tends to be a nitch type of spell.

But compare it to A-C....even without the Boost Construct and Overchannel.

The conclusion of a comparison (with feats and specialized or without feats and not specialized) is obvious; A-C is over-powered as written.

You have not shown this in any way, shape, or form.

It is not obvious, in fact there is no reason to even assume it is true with what is given so far in this thread.

Even if we could prove that in 100% of the situations AC is 'always' better and even 'always much better' it still would not prove that AC is overpowered.

Add in the fact that psions can do twice to three times as many high level A-C in a day than a regular spell caster, and you've got a whole truck-load of wacked.

Again, the cleric has similar amounts of spells to the sorcerer, who is 'way' ahead of the psion in that area.

Even after your prc and feats and everything else (since you apparently have given up 0 caster levels, and really nothing at all) if your summons came out to be stronger than the AC even most of the time I would think that the AC was underpowered, and greatly so.

Your cleric starts off with a handicap and puts resources into making an option that is not very good as a meat shield and tries to do something that both he and the spell are not good at.

Vs a specialist who starts off with something that is designed to be a good meatshield and puts resources into it.

If the cleric ever came close without giving up major, major things then AC would need a boost in power.

Now, I know you wont agree with this. I am not sure how you can expect your cleric to be as good as the psion in this case. The cleric is better in nearly every other way than the psion and the cleric starts off gimped, and yet you are so surprised by the psion being better that it bothers you. Very confusing.

 

[Scion]

I'd just rather be able to trust the rule-set of XPH, as I do for Core. Psionics could be an elegant magic system, smoothing over many of the glaring problems with the default magic system.

Trusting the core is your first problem It has a lot of issues that have been known for some time but they just ignore or put bandaid patches on.

Between spells and powers the powers tend to be much more balanced. How many broken spells are there? how many broken powers?

If you go to the character optimization boards they have massive casting builds which destroy worlds, there are virtually none based on psionics.

psionics is a very nicely done system. In my eyes it is the most balanced form of magic to date.

 

[Scion]

Regarding the Psion(shaper): I was the DM for levels 12 thru 15. I'm a pretty tough DM => 17 deaths over 8 gaming sessions. In that time period, every single character died at least once.....except the psion.

Read that over gain, 'cause it bears repeating.

Just as much as repeating that it means little to nothing. If you had a commoner who was 5 levels below you walking around with your group everywhere and he was the only one to have survived every encounter that had happened so far that does not make the commoner overpowered, or even a good class.

Now, gaming style, as well as raw power, often heavily affect things like this. That's a given. To make sure I wasn't just letting the psion off easy, I specifically tailored many of the later encounters to put him at "exceptional risk". Mooks with the Mageslayer feat chain. Severe limits on teleportation and scrying. Monsters immune to mind-affecting magic. Creatures that could teleport as a purely mental action. BBEGs that singled out the psion. Energy resistance, spell/power resistance, Spell turning, etc.

Most of this isnt especially useful against summoners except for the mageslayer feat, and that is what the rest of the party is for. So I am unsure how this is specifically targetting him.

Now, it'd be a great thing against psions in general, but certain builds have different things they care about, same as with any class.

Of course, if a BBEG specifically targets any one player over all others then that guy is in trouble. It doesnt matter who he is. Most buffs are so short in duration it is laughable, he is a d4 hd character anyway, and he is spending all of his time trying to hide away from guys to get off his 1 round manifesting time powers.

So, since all of these would've been just as (in)effective against any other summoner character what does this prove?

Oh, except the cleric, who has a much higher surviveability so being targetted wouldnt have mattered as much.

The psion came close (like during the combat with the CR 20 guardian demon Kerzit - they were APL 13, BTW), but was always able to both significantly contribute to the fight's outcome and keep himself alive. Precious few times did he come close to running out of pp. Never (yep: never) did he actually run out of pp.

At this point, if it was a full day of manifesting and other threats, I 'would' accuse the guy of cheating.

Unless of course we have very different meanings of 'contribute significantly'.

Of course, if he is spending half of his time protecting himself then he will have higher surviveability than the guy who is constantly trying to be offensive to the enemies.

This psion of yours sounds way outside of the bubble. He has 'tons' of hp, 'tons' of pp, and somehow is never really significantly challenged except in very rare situations. He also always has time to put up buffs (which in 3.5 tend to be so short they are mostly worthless except when surprising an enemy).

Now, I must be missing something from your gaming experience. A few bits of info that have not been mentioned. Otherwise, we are very, very far into the 'highly improbably' side of the equation.

Just because something can happen one in a billion times does not make it a problem per se, merely a probabilitical anomaly.

Psionic powers/feats that caused the most "trouble": (note the quotes!)

• 
  
  Noted. Now, what does it mean?
  
  

  [*] Mass Ectoplasmic Coccoon

  
  SR + Save + makes the target immune to almost everything and is easy for a teamate to break them out of it, but cuts off their actions.
  
  I guess the problem was a no SR, failed save, no buddies bad guy who was carried back to town (or kept in it long enough for everyone to buff up)?
  
  It is basically the psionic version of forcecage, with a few differences.
  
  

  [*]Psychic Reformation

  
  Eh, it does what it does very well, so long as you use it properly and dont let people make up rules for it you'll be fine. (all changes must be legal for the level you are reforming, it costs a bunch of exp, etc)
  
  

  [*]"Crystal Storm" (some Dragon Mag power, no SR, 7d4 Con dam when overchanneled!)

  
  Dragon magazine has a good habit of producing all powerful things. This has zero to do with psionics. They could've easily made it a magic spell and people would just say,'wow, another broken spell', but if they make it psionic people start thinking psionics are the problem.. weird..
  
  
  

  [*]Dimensional slide (as a move action)

  
  You dont like people useing a move action + pp to take a move action? I am confused.
  
  It can help to get over terrain you might have otherwise needed to make some sort of skill check for, but it is a psychic warrior only power which takes a bunch of pp and takes you only a very short distance. What 'trouble' could it have caused?
  
  

  [*]the huge duration of many of the defensive powers

  
  Umm.. ok.. we are reading different books again.
  
  Most spells and powers have durations which are too short to be useful to begin with. 1min/level or less is basically only good in surprise situations where you have surprise, otherwise taking a round out of combat to put it up just isnt worth it (or it is insanely powerful of course).
  
  The psionic powers have the same problem that the spells do. Some have a good duration, most do not.

 

[Scion]

Two similar abilities should be similar in power. SM is balanced wrt other spells and class abilities within the core rules. A-C is far more powerful than SM, yet fills the same role. This is a problem, and detracts from fun.

Body adjustment and cure spells are 'similar', but they are very different in power. Would you like to make the first stronger or the second weaker?

SM is not necissarily balanced with other spells and classes in the core rules, at least not for what you are trying to do with it.

AC is not necissarily more powerful than SM, they do different things. They have 'some' similarities, but no where near all (much like the body adjustment vs cure spells).

I think the problem is trying to fit a square peg into the round hole and then calling one of the two broken because it doesnt work.

 

[Nail]

SM is not necissarily balanced with other spells and classes in the core rules....

And here (at last! After paragraphs and paragraphs and paragraphs!) is the core of our disagreement. There's no way I can convince you 'bout A-C if you think SM is wussy!

We should play together sometime (sans Psionics, of course). You'd see what I'm talking about.

 

[Scion]

And here (at last! After paragraphs and paragraphs and paragraphs!) is the core of our disagreement. There's no way I can convince you 'bout A-C if you think SM is wussy!

We should play together sometime (sans Psionics, of course). You'd see what I'm talking about.

You are claiming that it is balanced but you have proven no such thing. One could just as easily say that it isnt.

if you want to claim that SM is a good baseline then I would like you to show it somehow. If you want to assume it is true then I can just as easily assume that it is not true, or assume that AC is automatically fine as is.

Like I have said from the beggining of that discussion, you are not laying the ground work properly. Even if we compare AC and SM right down the line and find out every place where one is better than the other to everyones satisfaction very little is proven. Nothing with balance is proven, which is the problem, why bother doing it if it will do nothing useful?

so, prove that SM is (un)balanced. If you cant even do that, then how could you do anything like that for AC? How can we use SM as a comparison point if you cannot do so?