For Nail - The Psion

[Al'Kelhar]

You are claiming that it is balanced but you have proven no such thing. One could just as easily say that it isnt.
...
How can we use SM as a comparison point if you cannot do so?

The point is that the core rules are the baseline against which everything else is compared. This is not a dispute about whether the core rules are wimpy or certain "character concepts" or "builds" are "non-viable" in the core rules. I think what a number of people are stating is that taking the core rules as the base line of what character classes, skills, feats and powers are available with which to kill things and take their stuff, psionics is over-powered. Whether the game designers realise, post-design, that the core rules leave arcane spellcasters under-powered is not the what is at issue here. There are many feats and spells, in particular, in supplements like Complete Arcane and Complete Divine which are also over-powered in comparison to the core rules. This and XPH indicate, to my mind, that the game designers may well be thinking that spellcasters are under-powered in the core rules.

I think what you're saying is that psionics is an elegant magic system which is balanced against the challenges to be faced by D&D characters (killing things and taking their stuff) - and if that means that arcane spellcasters are too weak to face those challenges, then that's a problem for the arcane spellcasters, not psions and psionics generally.

That's an entirely valid viewpoint. But it does seem to fly in the face of the opinion of many that the arcane spellcasters, particularly the wizard, are amongst the most powerful of the core character classes. And in any analysis of whether any extra rules are balanced or not, the core character classes, skills, feats and power must be used as a baseline.

I agree that my analysis of the XPH that you critique is done at a very superficial level. That's a consequence of limits on my time and overall interest in the subject. Nevertheless, I still consider it demonstrates that, as a magic system, psionics as presented in the XPH is more powerful than the spellcasting systems presented in the core rules. The caution that I advocate is that psionics cannot be simply "plonked down" into a campaign otherwise predicated on core rules without some adjustments, in particular, to the arcane magic system.

Cheers, Al'Kelhar

 

[Jhulae]

The point is that the core rules are the baseline against which everything else is compared. This is not a dispute about whether the core rules are wimpy or certain "character concepts" or "builds" are "non-viable" in the core rules. I think what a number of people are stating is that taking the core rules as the base line of what character classes, skills, feats and powers are available with which to kill things and take their stuff, psionics is over-powered.

Sadly, even when you compare some Core Rules item to other Core Rules things, some of the Core Rules are underpowered.

People can't just dogmatically say "the Core Rules are the baseline" when the Core Rules aren't necessarily consisntent with themselves.

 

[green slime]

Sadly, even when you compare some Core Rules item to other Core Rules things, some of the Core Rules are underpowered.

People can't just dogmatically say "the Core Rules are the baseline" when the Core Rules aren't necessarily consisntent with themselves.

The core rules are baseline. This does not mean that certain aspects of those rules are not weaker than others. But it is a base for which discussion can be had around.

 

[Jhulae]

The core rules are baseline. This does not mean that certain aspects of those rules are not weaker than others. But it is a base for which discussion can be had around.

Except, if you can't necessarily compare one build in Core with another build in Core how can you consider that a 'baseline'?

 

[Scion]

The point is that the core rules are the baseline against which everything else is compared. This is not a dispute about whether the core rules are wimpy or certain "character concepts" or "builds" are "non-viable" in the core rules. I think what a number of people are stating is that taking the core rules as the base line of what character classes, skills, feats and powers are available with which to kill things and take their stuff, psionics is over-powered.

As others have said, the core is not a good baseline to itself, so which point do you compare to?

Each class tends to have its own strengths and weaknesses. Some are shared with other classes, some are unique to itself.

Now, we could go through everything in each book where any class is stronger than the others and say that because it is stronger than all of the others in that field it is overpowered, but it would be pointless. Each class 'should' have some strengths over the others, somewhere that it calls home and where it is best qualified to do some job.

Taking this a step further, say we were to compare something that one class is bad at to something another class is good at. Then we see a 'huge' disparity in power level for that particular item. Does this mean the one that is good at it is broken? No, it might be, but there is no useful comparison going on here. Even if there was a magical 'baseline' with which to compare just because something is above it to some degree 'also' does not make it broken or overpowered.

Some have glossed over any comparisons I have made to the cleric because the cleric is 'overpowered'. This seems rather odd considering what you have just said Al'Kehlar, so now this means that the core is the baseline, but that baseline shifts depending on who you talk to and what they allow and what they call 'overpowered'. Further skewing the line of what is acceptable or not.

Still though, the point keeps coming back to the same thing: Just because one class is better at something than another does not make it overpowered directly.

It may very well be that some things are overpowered, but it has not been shown. A few people have said, 'in my experience it is overpowered', and a few others have said, 'in my experience it is not overpowered'. The same could be said for nearly every class (possibly every class if you discount some/all of the npc classes, although I have heard of people calling the expert overpowered in 3.0), does that mean that every class is overpowered/underpowered?


Nail would like to do a comparison useing SM and AC to show that AC is overpowered. I explained why I felt this was not going to be easy and might wind up being a waste of time, but then asked him to explain why he thought SM was balanced. Just because it is in the core does not make it so, nor should there be an automatic assumption of such. Plus, if he ever did give a thorough analysis which showed why he thought it was then it would provide a decent springboard from which to start a real comparison with AC. Two birds, one stone, good trade right?


Whatever this mystical baseline is seems to change from person to person. If we are going to use the core as a baseline then what do we compare with? Nothing can be stronger than it? nothing weaker? nothing far out there where it hasnt tread yet? Nothing that might break some of the rules it set up in intersting ways? This game is run by people, it can be much more open ended than just the core.

Besides, the core only has a few things in it, there are multitudes of items out there which would be balanced just fine but that the core hasnt even dreamed of.

Just because something doesnt have a corallary in the core does not make it broken. Just because something might be stronger than what is in the core does not make it overpowered.

 

[Nail]

As others have said, the core is not a good baseline to itself, so which point do you compare to?

Nice redirect.

Although the Core RAW is not perfect (nor expected to be so), it is still the fundamental yardstick with which we compare other things.

As I've said before, if we can't agree on a basis for comparsion, there's nothing more to discuss. That's too bad.

Just because something might be stronger than what is in the core does not make it overpowered.

...but it's a very strong indicator.

Just because I hear a train coming, and I happen to be standing on train tracks, does not necessarily mean I will shortly be hit by a train.

Still, the good advice would be to step off the tracks and look around, eh?

 

[Scion]

it isnt a 'strong indicator', it might be said to be an indicator, but definately not a strong one. Even 'indicator' is a pretty poor descriptor as it labels something in a potentially harmful way without giving it a chance. Guilty before proven innocent, harsh.

Still, you havent answered even the most fundamental question about this comparison you want to do, there is no ground to stand on.

I keep on asking you to fill in this baseline you want to use, but you either can not or will not. Dropping the, 'but its core' card means less than nothing to me, the core is far from perfect.

So, you want this comparison, first you have to show how and why SM is balanced. (the sayings, 'it is balanced in my game' is likewise not helpful. After all, AC is balanced in every game I have been in, so if my experience is not good enough for you then we need some other criteria )

 

[Someone]

Besides, if we´re going to compare, I think we should compare Astral Construct with Summon Nature´s ally, not Summon Monster. AC is the shapers shtick, and SNA is the druids schtick (and wildshaping, and... but let´s not derail it). Druids get most of the elementals, the best heavy hitters, one spell level earlier than clerics or wizards; this also applies to the animals in the list (being non-templated, they have a lower CR, but the same damage potential). They can use Animal Growth to buff the summoned animals to stupid levels. They (and clerics) have an alternative to Summon spells with giant vermin, that scales without using higher spell slots, and has the advantage of a casting time of 1 standard action.

 

[Nail]

So, you want this comparison, first you have to show how and why SM is balanced.

And to show SM is balanced, to what shall I compare it, O arbiter of comparisons?

 

[Nail]

Besides, if we´re going to compare, I think we should compare Astral Construct with Summon Nature´s ally, not Summon Monster.

I afraid Scion will disagree. He'll say either a) SNA is not the Druid's schtick, or b) SNA does different things than A-C.