Has anyone tried Psionics in an AU/AE game?

[Herobizkit]

I long to use my Arcana Unearthed manual, and I've recently picked up the Expanded Psionics Handbook. Has anyone found a way to quickly and easily incorporate Psionics into Monte's elegant system? Are there any difficulties I should watch out for? Any obvious abuse problems?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I don't think that adding Psionics to AE is more diffcult then adding Psionics to D&D.
The "power" of magic is similar in both settings (even if there might be some individual differences).

Some integration problems might be related to Truenames:
1) Do Psionic characters get the extra talent/ceremony feat at 1st level?
2) Do the power equivalent of truename spells also require truenames (if not, that might seem unfair).
3) If you use truenames for psionic powers, which powers require truenames (since there might not always be equivalents to AE spells)

Another problem could be multiclassing - caster level stack in AE, and spells readied/spells per day are pooled together - the latter is probably not possible with Psionics (though maybe you could simply say 1 power point is always equal a 1st level spell, and the rest can be done via spell weaving).

You might have a "flavour" problem, since some AE classes have psionic features (Witch, Akashic). The Witch uses the AE magic system. All spellcasters have access to psionic spells and to the Psion feat.

 

[Henry]

My personal opinion is that XPH psionics will be HORRIBLY, HORRIBLY more powerful than the existing magic in Arcana Unearthed. A kineticist would blow away any Magister in the game on sheer damage and buffing potential. I would very carefully observe the Energy Powers, the telepathy spells like suggestion and domination, and the schism power. The astral constructs are also quite powerful compared to the energy creature spells.

The feats psionic shot, psionic weapon, psionic strike, and their Greater counterparts should also be examined with a critical eye - maybe reducing them to 1d6 and 2d6, respectively, perhaps?

The mechanics of the classes themselves, however, are quite sound and would work side by side - AU magic is already as much or more flexible than Power Points.

 

[Michael Tree]

My personal opinion is that XPH psionics will be HORRIBLY, HORRIBLY more powerful than the existing magic in Arcana Unearthed. A kineticist would blow away any Magister in the game on sheer damage and buffing potential. I would very carefully observe the Energy Powers, the telepathy spells like suggestion and domination, and the schism power. The astral constructs are also quite powerful compared to the energy creature spells.

I disagree about the damage and buffing potential. The main advantage that XPH damage powers have over D&D powers is the ability to choose the elemental type, which AU casters also have. Plus, the lack of automatic scaling of damage is even more weak compared to AU casters, considering their ability to use Modify spell for +50% damage, spell templates, and the weaving of spell slots. XPH powers also have more difficulty with spell resistance, since it has no equivalent of brandish magical might or the other spells that improve caster level.

XPH buffing also isn't neccessarily any better than in AU, overall. It's stronger in terms of enhancement bonuses to ability scores and attack/ac bonuses, but AU has things like ghost weapon that provide bonuses not available in psionics.

I'm not sure I agree about the telepathy powers. The XPH equivalents don't require truenames (unless you decide they do), and they're somewhat more flexible in terms of what types of creatures they can affect, but IMO its reasonable for psionics to be more powerful than magic in one area.

The powers I'd be most concerned about are Schism (since there is no equivalent in AU, and extra actions are enormously powerful), and Metamorphosis (which is broken, though it does have a relatively short duration). I don't have enough experience with energy creatures to determine how they hold up next to astral constructs, but I suspect you're right.

 

[Henry]

I disagree about the damage and buffing potential. The main advantage that XPH damage powers have over D&D powers is the ability to choose the elemental type, which AU casters also have. Plus, the lack of automatic scaling of damage is even more weak compared to AU casters, considering their ability to use Modify spell for +50% damage, spell templates, and the weaving of spell slots. XPH powers also have more difficulty with spell resistance, since it has no equivalent of brandish magical might or the other spells that improve caster level.

I should amend myself, here - you're right, after 5th level or so, it balances out. However, the most powerful damaging spell Magisters have from first through 4th level is Fireburst - while psions have energy ray, energy missile, energy push, and energy stun, all of which knock the magister's socks off in damage. I'd amend it so that these powers are altered or removed to higher levels, myself - or at least alter them that it's +1d6 damage per two power points, or similar.

 

[Varianor Abroad]

I believe Siobharek (also on the Council) did add them into his game. No feedback yet though. My game folded, and I never had XPH anyway....

 

[Odhanan]

I used some psionics in my game. Works fine with AE spellcasters.

My personal opinion is that XPH psionics will be HORRIBLY, HORRIBLY more powerful than the existing magic in Arcana Unearthed.

(...)

I should amend myself, here - you're right, after 5th level or so, it balances out. However, the most powerful damaging spell Magisters have from first through 4th level is Fireburst - while psions have energy ray, energy missile, energy push, and energy stun, all of which knock the magister's socks off in damage.

It didn't appear unbalanced in my game. Granted, the PCs were around level 5/6 by then. But after all, spellcasting in combat isn't only about how much damage or how many spells dealing damage you have. It's about damage yes, but tactics also (spells affecting movement, various modifiers to opponents, various buffing effects and so on).

 

[Henry]

It didn't appear unbalanced in my game. Granted, the PCs were around level 5/6 by then. But after all, spellcasting in combat isn't only about how much damage or how many spells dealing damage you have. It's about damage yes, but tactics also (spells affecting movement, various modifiers to opponents, various buffing effects and so on).

That's pretty much where the Magister shines at low levels - information, tactical control, and the like. Buffing is pretty low-key until higher level, though, unless you have spent feats on exotic spells. Otherwise, it's magic armor, lesser beastskin, and bashes and seekers. The command spells are good, but if an opponent is resistant or immune, you're in trouble. Our 1st through 3rd level magister's most effective tactic was to be guarded with the giant warmain, while other people tossed tindertwigs and candles that she blew upwith fireburst.

Psions, the damaging spells may well walk all over the magister's more subtle control, and the astral constructs definitely will outdo the energy creatures, IMO.