Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="chronichebetude" data-source="post: 3685183" data-attributes="member: 54278">Does the Talented feat in psionics apply when you overchannel to increase your manifester level by more than one? The only listed restrictions are that you must expend your psionic focus and the power must be 3rd level or lower to take no damage from overchanneling. So it seems like it would be legal to apply the feat when overchanneling for 2 or 3 extra levels, but when you use it like that it gets a little sticky.This is the situation that bothered me about the feat: My character's a 12th level psion and can overchannel for up to two extra levels(max of 14 power points on a power.) She has a 6th level Breath of the Black Dragon power, 11 pp, which does 11d6 damage plus an extra 1d6 damage for every extra point spent. She can overchannel to spend 14 pp and do 14d6 damage, but must take 3d8 damage from overchanneling. She also has a 3rd level Energy Bolt power, 5 pp, which does 5d6 damage plus an extra 1d6 damage for every extra point spent. If she overchannels to spend 14 pp on this power(an extra 9 pp), its damage increases to 14d6, the same as her Breath power, but with the Talented feat she would take no overchanneling damage because the Bolt is only 3rd level. On top of that, Energy Bolt can do an extra +1 point of damage per die if cold or fire energy is used. If fire energy is used, it does another extra point of damage per die because my character has the Privileged Energy feat with fire specified.So if Talented really does work when you overchannel to increase your manifester level by 2 or 3, the augmented Bolt would not only do more damage than an augmented Breath, it wouldn't require taking damage like the Breath would. This just seemed off to me. Is it really legal? It's out of the Expanded Psionics Handbook, if that helps any. It's entirely possible that I've just completely messed up somewhere here, so I may just be making a dumb mistake somewhere. =)</blockquote>

Verification