[XPH] Psion versus Wizard/Sorcerer

[Thanee]

Erm, Focus is a bit of an issue, and it's also been stated by the developer that the reason for the reduced cost was becaue of the Focus cost [WotC Psi boards].

Yeah, have seen that in your first post already.

But even then, making each feat better to compensate for that stupid focus thing might balance each other in some weird way, but it's pretty obvious, that the "cost" will only be circumvented, or the abilities be ignored (since metapsionics are basically redundant, anyways) in actual play, since the mechanic is so bad.

So, a psion can 'compete' with a Sorcerer in a "Single Metamagic Spell' with one feat [Psionic Meditation] (out of 5).

If you discount for what I have written above (especially the usage of 4+ metamagic feats for free) and let both start at an equal level, yes. But that's not a very accurate comparison then.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Drow Jones]

I have seen that table, but it seemed rather pointless to me, as you cannot divide psionic power usage by power level that way...

Why not? He is using PPs to get these numbers.

I see the table as a rough estimation on how many powers a psion will usually manifest for each level (augmented or not) during a typical adventuring day.

I know it is just one guy's take on his particular character, but it is from actual play.

- DJ

 

[Thanee]

I'd probably rather list powers per day in terms of PP spent on one power, not by power level, since powers of all levels are augmentable.

Well, ok, you can use it as an estimate of what is doable with a pretty normal distribution of PP over the power levels.

These numbers MUST be lower than those of both the wizard and the sorcerer, BTW!
If they were equal or higher, it would be even more ridiculous.

I just meant, that it completely neglects the huge options psions have with their flexibility.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

I know it is just one guy's take on his particular character, but it is from actual play.

You mean, he played the character from 1 through 20 and wrote down how many powers he actually used each day and took averages?

I somehow doubt that...

Bye
Thanee

 

[Drow Jones]

These numbers MUST be lower than those of both the wizard and the sorcerer, BTW!
If they were equal or higher, it would be even more ridiculous.

Hey, I'm not debating against you!
As I said (hinted) in a previous post, when I look at this table it looks like a psion can manifest a great amount of 6+ lvl powers even with a decent amount of low level utility powers. (At Psion levels 11+.)

I just meant, that it completely neglects the huge options psions have with their flexibility.

Of course. It's just an example of a possible manifestation distribution on a given character level per day.

- DJ

 

[Drow Jones]

You mean, he played the character from 1 through 20 and wrote down how many powers he actually used each day and took averages?

I somehow doubt that...

No, but I bet he took a look at powers the character has/will have at each level, and which he wants to manifest or are still useful to him (buffs, etc...) on a given character level, before estimating the numbers.

But you're right... I'm just assuming this.

- DJ

 

[Thanee]

Hey, I'm not debating against you!

As I said (hinted) in a previous post, when I look at this table it looks like a psion can manifest a great amount of 6+ lvl powers even with a decent amount of low level utility powers. (At Psion levels 11+.)

Yep.

About the other link you posted... I have only browsed through it. That's just one more item bolstering my confidence in stating, that WotC did no decent playtesting with that stuff (neither in 3.0, nor in 3.5).

Bye
Thanee

 

[kitoy]

But even then, making each feat better to compensate for that stupid focus thing might balance each other in some weird way, but it's pretty obvious, that the "cost" will only be circumvented, or the abilities be ignored (since metapsionics are basically redundant, anyways) in actual play, since the mechanic is so bad.

Have you actually played with the "focus thing" mechanic? If so could you give us details on how it went for you? If not, how can you make a blanket statement saying "the mechanic is so bad"?

Then a few posts later, you criticize the power point table from the WotC boards by asking if the maker of the table had played a psion from 1 to 20. Have you played a psion from 1 to 20?

As I've said before, you're making a lot of observations and criticisms based purely on speculation. Please give the unmodified psion from XPH a decent test run before you start making judgement calls.

If I remember correctly, that thread from the WotC boards is about people's acutal experience with psions in play. They're talking about how they burn through their pp in only a few or, in some cases, one combat. Some of that can be attributed to people learning how to play a psion, but can't some of the reason be that the psion was built to burn through pp at a faster rate than an arcane caster burns through spells?

 

[Thanee]

Have you actually played with the "focus thing" mechanic? If so could you give us details on how it went for you? If not, how can you make a blanket statement saying "the mechanic is so bad"?

By translating my game experience onto the subject.
I'm pretty sure, that the psionic focus will be mostly annoying.

Do you think psion players will pick up many feats, which require the expenditure of the focus? I don't. That's what I basically meant there. It just makes people stay away from those feats, which IMHO is a bad thing as it restricts character variability.

Then a few posts later, you criticize the power point table from the WotC boards by asking if the maker of the table had played a psion from 1 to 20. Have you played a psion from 1 to 20?

No, obviously not. It was a comment in reply to that the table was derived from game experience, which I just highly doubt, given the nature of the table and how it omits the most important information (the manifester level at which the powers are manifested - if he just means unaugmented powers, than the information in the table is pretty much useless as well, because it won't be like this in actual play).

As I've said before, you're making a lot of observations and criticisms based purely on speculation.

It's the other way around, actually, I am making speculations based on observations.

Please give the unmodified psion from XPH a decent test run before you start making judgement calls.

Well, I'm afraid, that's not going to happen. We've had enough with the updated 3.0 psion in our campaigns (and that's not purely my opinion).

And it really doesn't need any tests to see the differences between psion and sorcerer. Not much else I'm stating here (except my clearly labeled opinion, that this is the XPH's fault more than the PHB's).

If I remember correctly, that thread from the WotC boards is about people's acutal experience with psions in play. They're talking about how they burn through their pp in only a few or, in some cases, one combat. Some of that can be attributed to people learning how to play a psion, but can't some of the reason be that the psion was built to burn through pp at a faster rate than an arcane caster burns through spells?

Well, obviously. You just have to take a look at the scaling versus augmentation issues.

The only thing, which can only really be seen in play is how my assumption, that spells and powers are roughly equal in power, is correct or in what direction it is shifted.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Zhure]

If that's the only difference for you... I know quite a
few more...

I'm listening but hear nothing. The primary advantage for the 'still' and 'silent' applications of psionics is being able to manifest in a silence field. It's a rare case.

Yeah, everyone would. More choice. But noone gets those feats.
The psion has the abilities mentioned, tho.

But not, as you imply, the four feats. It's similar in function but far weaker.

Just, that the psion needs maybe 2-3 to cover most relevant aspects and the arcanist two or three times that many (most won't even get that many, of course, and rather leave out some not so important aspects, but still) and then needs to renew them a couple levels later because they are capped.

No, the numbers are identical for both.

Yeah, I'd also rather have melf's acid arrow instead of energy missile... erm... not!

You would when facing all those summoned arcanist creatures with fire/cold immunity.

And what does the psion need this feat for!? Most powers have it built-in!!!

Acid?

And please don't get back to the Globe of Invulnerability now (which certainly isn't a factor at most encounters), yes it doesn't help against those (that's what higher level powers are for), but it does add to the DC, which is the primary advantage of Heighten!

But it's ok if we ignore the primary advantage of Globe of Invulnerability?

Yep, the wizard has one more feat. The psion has much better choices for his feats, tho (all psionic feats in addition to metapsionics/-magic, which wizards are not very good at using and item creation). Guess that's pretty even in the end between psion and wizard.

Correct. The psion gets slightly better feats but slightly fewer than a wizard.

How about you make a list... all abilities a 10th level summoner can get and all abilities the MT psion can get... then try to compare, if you have enough paper to write all those abilities down, that is...

Ok, I have my list of all summoned monster abilities. (See attached.)

I take it... you really do not see the difference...

The difference is a lot of summoned creatures are extraplanar and Metamorphic Transfer won't grant those abilities.

Summoned monsters are good, of course. Psions can create astral constructs. Forgot?

Now we're talking about ANOTHER feat for the psion. He can't have both Astral Construct AND Metamorphasis without yet another feat.

And summoning has one huge drawback (the 1 round casting time). It takes considereable amounts of resources to counteract this, if you don't want to let your spells get ruined.

So does Astral Construct.

But ok, if you don't see the difference between the two... it's not like this would be an important item... I do not base my argumentation on single broken abilities. This particular one I just like to point out, as it is so immensely unbalanced.

I'll grant that it might be unbalanced, but no one has showed it to be yet in any way.

Just one lil side note... There once was a book called Magic of Faerûn. It had a spell called Fiendform. It allowed to assume the form of a fiend (one you can summon via Summon Monster I-VI) and use the abilities of that fiend.

Not being familiar with the spell I can't comment on it, but I'd have to guess it's was either not a full round cast, or of a longer duration than the summon monster spells.

Still WotC had to errata that spell, because it was horribly unbalanced!

Why? You could simply summon the fiend and let him do the stuff for you... maybe there's a slight difference?

I'd still far rather face a caster transformed into a Girallon then a fiendish Girallon AND a caster.