[XPH] Psion versus Wizard/Sorcerer

[Thanee]

My comments were purely in response to the thread itself, not the rules debate, except so far as the debate related to some bad experience somebody apparantly had with a converted Psion, in which I felt some curiosity.

Bad experiences... well... the psion is just completely unbalanced and the rules are in no way playtested (otherwise they wouldn't be written as they are).

And the 3.5 psion is very similar to the 3.0 one (with upgrades). The stuff that has changed (which is quite a bit, tho) makes him a lot stronger, but takes away some very silly abilities (altho adding others, which doesn't make it any better in the end).

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

The primary focus expenders are metapsi feats. Given that until you are high level it is nearly impossible to apply multiple metamagic feats to a single spell, the same should hold true for metapsi. The focus requirement causes that. IMO psions are just as likely to pick up multiple metapsi feats as sorcerers ar to pick up metamagic feats. In other words, they'll ge the ones they want to be able to use.

Which metapsionic feats would you pick?
Me? Probably only Quicken.

Except for some weird high end stuff (like Twin), there is nothing the psion needs (IMHO, of course).

Bye
Thanee

 

[James McMurray]

Second, there is no regain focus defensively ability (always generates AoO).

Since regaining focus is a skill use that provokes an AoO, you cn technically use it defensively via concentration, with a DC of 15.

 

[Thanee]

I feel that psionic characters are balanced in comparison to wizards.

What do you think about sorcerers then? Weaker than both? Equal?

Psionic focus is hard to regain in combat. First, at best regaining focus is a move action. Second, there is no regain focus defensively ability (always generates AoO).

Yep, altho the feats you will use that on are better than what you get as a spellcaster, don't forget this. Power Penetration (most important one, IMHO) is twice as good. Psionic Endowment grants a DC increase to every discipline (hard to say, if this is worth it, given that you can buy Psionatrix - OTOH +DC is always good ). Quicken Power is not even available in that way to other casters (and is only +3 levels).

The biggest disadvantage of the focus is surely, that you can't do all at once. That hurts.

The other weakness for psionic characters is that you will run down on power points fast. My character would never throw 216 energy missiles.

Noone with a sane mind would!
It was just a silly example to counter another silly example, after all.

Instead, psionic character must augment to the max in order to maintain efficency.

Yeah, that's a given. Altho, they don't need to augment to the max to keep up, maybe like 60-80% (rough estimate) on average (that's the one thing, I am not exactly sure how it works out without actual playtesting - as I stated a few times by now). And some powers scale the same as spells (no augmentation necessary)! A clever psion player will be able to find a good balance here and manifest at least about as many spells as a wizard, I'm quite sure.

The evoker that I play with does not ever run out of spells even with his two lesser rods of quickening.

You don't have many combats per day, or have you?

In our games, spellcasters often run out of spells (at least the ones that do something impressive, like the three highest available spell levels), or at least have to save some for later and not just start blasting away.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Psiblade]

Hello Thanee,

What do you think about sorcerers then? Weaker than both? Equal?

I see sorcerers as being slightly weaker than psions and wizards. The additional feats, skills, and flexibility of psions & wizards makes them stronger than sorcerers in most home games. The inability to use quickening rods also really hurts.

You don't have many combats per day, or have you?

Even our high level combats rarely last more than 4 to 5 rounds, except when fighting dragons! The average fight is around four rounds. We average about three or four major fights between rests. Average casting power required is only around 15 major spells. The grey elf evoker / elemental savant (16th level) has 21 spells of 5th or higher level. Even his lowly cone of cold/acid does 15d6 (DC 25). He also really likes chain lightning, horrid wilting, evard's black tentacles (4th), and delayed blast fire(acid)ball. He can quicken 12x with his rods during that time also. Favored spells to be quicken with rod are scorching ray(fire or acid), fire/acid blall, ray of enfeeblement, and magic missile. That is quite a lot of damage.

The ability to blow though PR with penetration +8 is a big deal! SR/PR is what makes monsters tough for wizards/psions. I do think that ability is on the high side.

-Psiblade

 

[Thanee]

Geez, are you actually using the Elemental Savant as is in 3.5?

Bye
Thanee

 

[James McMurray]

Geez, are you actually using the Elemental Savant as is in 3.5?

Bye
Thanee

Why wouldn't you? No T&B handy, so I can't check it out myself, but I don't remember it being too powerful.

 

[The Iron Mark]

What feat or power is that? There's a metamagic feat that turns a touch spell into a ranged touch spell, but that's hardly the same thing. I've never seen any printed material that allows a caster or manifester to use personal-range spells/powers on others (aside from sharing spells with familiars/psicrystals).

He's probably thinking of the Channel Power feat at http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20010928a. Very handy power if I do say so myself. Only 3.0 though, if that matters for your group..

 

[Psiblade]

Geez, are you actually using the Elemental Savant as is in 3.5?

I have not heard of any problems with elemental savants in 3.5. I am not the player of the wizard, I just know the stats and about the belt full of quickening rods. I know that the RPGA allows them in the living campaigns. What problems have you had with them?

-Psiblade

 

[nimisgod]

I think Thanee's referring to the nerfing of all Save DC boosting abilities in PrCs and Feats that was done in the revision.