Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Yair" data-source="post: 1708400" data-attributes="member: 10913">Interesting concept. I am not familiar with the erudite and psychic thief (dragon, I presume?), but I can comment on the rest. I am running a very spionics-heavy party at the moment (two psions and one wilder, plus a druid, fighter, and ranger) and they don't heal people well. If you are going to have an all-psionics campaign, I suggest vastly improving empathic transfer (IIRC the name of the power that transfers hit point loss), to the point where psionic healing would be on par with clerical healing.As for soulknife replacing the druid.... well, no. Completely different flavor. But there is no essential need to keep the druid archetype; it could just be a psion/erudite protecting the wilderness. Works too with the elves' favored class (erudite, in this campaign, presumably).I also found a lot of magic items were based on arcane powers (which in my campaign is evil), so you might want to think about that. Try making a ring of feather-fall and you'll see what I mean.The key point, however, is balance. Are the psionic classes better balanced? I am not at all sure. Consider the amount of playtesting done on the 3.5 classes by the hordes of D&amp;D players, compared to that done on the XPH classes. So far, the psionic classes seem cool in my campaign - but balanced? I am not sure. The druid and two psions in my campaign kick *ss, putting the wilder fighter and ranger to shame - but I am not sure how typical this result is. At any case, I don't think them more balanced then the PH classes, or compared to the PH non-magical classes. Not at all.So in answer to your question - it might make an interesting campaign world. But I won't do it because of the balance, no.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Yair, post: 1708400, member: 10913"] Interesting concept. I am not familiar with the erudite and psychic thief (dragon, I presume?), but I can comment on the rest. I am running a very spionics-heavy party at the moment (two psions and one wilder, plus a druid, fighter, and ranger) and they [I]don't[/I] heal people well. If you are going to have an all-psionics campaign, I suggest vastly improving empathic transfer (IIRC the name of the power that transfers hit point loss), to the point where psionic healing would be on par with clerical healing. As for soulknife replacing the druid.... well, no. Completely different flavor. But there is no essential need to keep the druid archetype; it could just be a psion/erudite protecting the wilderness. Works too with the elves' favored class (erudite, in this campaign, presumably). I also found a lot of magic items were based on arcane powers (which in my campaign is evil), so you might want to think about that. Try making a ring of feather-fall and you'll see what I mean. The key point, however, is balance. [I]Are[/I] the psionic classes better balanced? I am not at all sure. Consider the amount of playtesting done on the 3.5 classes by the hordes of D&D players, compared to that done on the XPH classes. So far, the psionic classes seem cool in my campaign - but balanced? I am not sure. The druid and two psions in my campaign kick *ss, putting the wilder fighter and ranger to shame - but I am not sure how typical this result is. At any case, I don't think them more balanced then the PH classes, or compared to the PH non-magical classes. Not at all. So in answer to your question - it might make an interesting campaign world. But I won't do it because of the balance, no. [/QUOTE]

Verification