Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Omnirahk, half-Rahkshi 07-03-07, 04:42 PM	I need some help proving to him that never having to spend money on a weapon does not warrant a nerf. Arguments. Good ways to prove it. I currently have to face: - fort. saves vs negative levels whenever my mind blade is sundered or disarmed, or if I lose it (yes, I can lose it. If I don't remember to say I demanifest the blade). Because it's part of my soul - reflex saves dropped to poor, because there's no reason for it to be good - will saves to half psychic strike (at least I talked him out of will none) - concentration checks to charge psychic strike in battle In exchange, I get full BAB. Help me. P.S. Sorry if I don't get back. The next 48 hours I may have a hard time getting to a computer. I'll be back after that.
Rageheart 07-03-07, 04:52 PM	:OMG! play a druid... you'll be a better frontliner. Seriously, is there any reason he is giving to support these draconian cuts? The Soulknife has enough problems as it is. To show this to him have a one on one melee vs a ranger, with the nerfed version and then un-nerfed.
Omnirahk, half-Rahkshi 07-03-07, 05:05 PM	Reasons . . . he didn't like not having to spend a copper on weaponry. Especially with the good starting gold. Further, he argued that the original soulknife was published after officially being edited and playtested, so it was supposedly balanced. He had to compensate for "improving" it by giving it better BAB. I thought I had talked him out his viewpoint on psionics. Something about "damn powergamers and their psionics." I thought since I had convinced him to give it a try we were past that. I'll see if I can get that battle with the ranger. I just hope the ranger will actually sunder or disarm, to help prove how bad that :censored:ing negative level rule is. That's the one I hate most. Even if it is flavorful. Can we say 3.0 psionic combat?
WackyOne 07-03-07, 05:05 PM	Better yet - if he wants the playtest fight at highish level (say... 8th+), make it vs a druid. Even without casting a single spell but wild shaping, he will own the soulknife - any version, I think ;) By the way... does he think that the soulknife gets a too powerful weapon for his level? Because when you factor the Greater Magic Weapon spell in... it's actually too weak a weapon (it's +5 with +5 of abilities - fighters could, with a friendly wizard to help them, get a +5 weapon with +9 of abilities) Or is the dm nerfing fighters too? ;)
Vharuck 07-03-07, 05:07 PM	I need some help proving to him that never having to spend money on a weapon does not warrant a nerf. Arguments. Good ways to prove it. I currently have to face: - fort. saves vs negative levels whenever my mind blade is sundered or disarmed, or if I lose it (yes, I can lose it. If I don't remember to say I demanifest the blade). Because it's part of my soul Aside from the name of the class, nothing ever says it's part of your soul. And you could even call that a misnomer, like the Barbarian. The things is actually called a mindblade and is you focusing psionic energy into a corporeal form as a weapon. If he wants you to lose levels, have the wizard make saves after his magic missiles strike their target. I mean, he put his energy into that and now they're gone! - reflex saves dropped to poor, because there's no reason for it to be good Except that the armor proficiency and skill list really imply that soulknives are sneaky and dextrous combatants. - will saves to half psychic strike (at least I talked him out of will none) Makes no sense. He's not casting a power on the person. This ability isn't as great as people think it is when reading anyways. - concentration checks to charge psychic strike in battle Flavor-wise makes sense, but I believe "If it ain't broke, don't fix it. In exchange, I get full BAB. Help me. That's nice, but now they class is too discordant. Full BAB helps primary melee, but with your armor, lack of shield, and HD you're not going to be primary melee. Has your DM even seen one in play? Or is he knee-jerking all this?
Adrez Nesnsid 07-03-07, 05:15 PM	I need some help proving to him that never having to spend money on a weapon does not warrant a nerf. I think that the best argument against nerfing the soulknife is that never having to spend money on a weapon is basically their only noteworthy power.
Rageheart 07-03-07, 05:18 PM	Reasons . . . he didn't like not having to spend a copper on weaponry. Especially with the good starting gold. Offer to start as a Pauper, take the low starting gold... or if you are confident start Really poor. Further, he argued that the original soulknife was published after officially being edited and playtested, so it was supposedly balanced. Um... the Original Soulknife was a PRC so I don't get that. He had to compensate for "improving" it by giving it better BAB. Turn down his offer of a Good BAB, pointing out that a 5 point gain in BAB it isn't worth a -6 to Ref saves (At level 20) and the risk of losing a level every time you lose a mindblade.
Stormonu 07-03-07, 05:19 PM	In a perverse manner of speaking, it does make sense.. A basic shortsword is 10 gp mw shortsword 310 gp +1 shortsword 2,310 gp +2 shortsword 8,310 gp +3 shortsword 18,310 gp etc. So, in a manner of speaking, by 8th level (where you get a +2 equivilant weapon), your getting over 8,000 gp in weapons for free. And since you can change around those enhancements for Defending, Keen or others, it actually makes it worth more... However, I'd ask the DM what he intends to do about monks. Their unarmed attacks increase in damage as the monk gains level (and overall, the increased damage is better than an enhancement to damage), they can strike as magic and lawful weapons and they can't be disarmed of their unarmed strike or have them sundered at all - that's far more powerful than the soulknife, whose weapons can be both either sundered or disarmed. If he isn't willing to nerf the monk's free unarmed attacks, I don't think he has any business messing with the soulknife.
Vharuck 07-03-07, 05:24 PM	So, in a manner of speaking, by 8th level (where you get a +2 equivilant weapon), your getting over 8,000 gp in weapons for free. And since you can change around those enhancements for Defending, Keen or others, it actually makes it worth more... But that's your class abilities. Getting a single weapon and making it decent for free. However, you won't best even a Fighter in melee, because... Your attack bonus will always be behind the Fighter's, even if you spend all that gold your free weapon saved you (which you will) on attack-boosting items. You'll also need to buy better armor as yours is crap for a meleer. Also you'll need to improve your Constitution to make sure you can survive melee. In other words, your weapon is great for melee, but you kinda aren't. That saved money makes it so you are. On these boards, the Soulknife is considered a weak class.
Omnirahk, half-Rahkshi 07-03-07, 05:25 PM	[QUOTE=Rageheart;12950578]Um... the Original Soulknife was a PRC so I don't get that.QUOTE] Correction then. The original soulknife base class. Although I do see flaws in this argument. He's saying it's published, so it's balanced. So giving it stuff requires taking away stuff. But it's not balanced and needs nerfing. wtf?! I'm thinking psionics grudge.
Rageheart 07-03-07, 05:27 PM	So, in a manner of speaking, by 8th level (where you get a +2 equivilant weapon), your getting over 8,000 gp in weapons for free. And since you can change around those enhancements for Defending, Keen or others, it actually makes it worth more... I disagree... take the mindblade away and throw a 8th lvl Soulknife in an arena with a 8th Lvl Fighter, both armed with just clubs. ...anyone care to bet me that the Fighter won't stomp 8k worth of a mudpuddle in the Soulknife's tail?
Enchanter_Tom 07-03-07, 05:28 PM	Ask your DM the following: "If the soulknife is overpowered, then why are there so many player-designed fixes that make it stronger?" If he refuses to listen to reason, play a druid.
Stormonu 07-03-07, 05:31 PM	But that's your class abilities. Getting a single weapon and making it decent for free. However, you won't best even a Fighter in melee, because... Your attack bonus will always be behind the Fighter's, even if you spend all that gold your free weapon saved you (which you will) on attack-boosting items. You'll also need to buy better armor as yours is crap for a meleer. Also you'll need to improve your Constitution to make sure you can survive melee. In other words, your weapon is great for melee, but you kinda aren't. That saved money makes it so you are. On these boards, the Soulknife is considered a weak class. Overall, I agree - your money will go elsewhere. I was, in sense being sarcastic. The monk is an excellent example that "free weapons" aren't unbalancing (and in a monk's case, not using armor either), and as mentioned by others both the druid [in wild shape] and wizards casting spells can get by without sinking into magic weapons. I mean, how many wizards do you see running around with +5 vorpal daggers at 20th level? Your soulknife won't be sinking money into weapons, but you can be assured he'll being sinking it somewhere else.
Archtyrant Terevoth 07-03-07, 05:36 PM	Your DM is a fool, basically. The soulknife is a very underpowered class, worse even than a straight fighter. Instead of class features, for the most part it gets a blade enhancement, which is nothing more than a free magic weapon. But of course, the cleric already gets that from just casting the greater magic weapon spell. NOt only that but he can also cast GMW on an already enchanted weapon to further enhance it. So +1 flaming burst can become +3 flaming burst for instance. Of course, the soulknife can't do that, because his bonus applies only on his mind blades, not any weapon he wants. So the soulknife's main ability is a watered down version of what any cleric can do with a 3rd level spellslot. Yeah, that really needs to be nerfed... :rolleyes:
WolfHati 07-03-07, 05:49 PM	Your DM is nerfing the soulknife? When I looked over it I couldn't believe the less than full base attack bonus wasn't a misprint considering how little the class had to make up for it. You effectively get a customizable weapon that you can never lose, but is probably going to be worse than magic weapons you have crafted yourself.
Khan the Destroyer 07-03-07, 05:53 PM	If the DM is concerned with wealth, wouldn't it make more sense to just deduct the money you'd be saving from your character wealth anyways? I mean... what does slashing your reflex saves, forcing will saves for 1/2 damage against psychic strike, risking losing your mindblade, or even gaining negative levels have anything to do with saving some gold? If he's worried about your gold, just effectively 'buy' the weapon.
Xaxor 07-03-07, 06:15 PM	I think we of the Psionics Board should create an award for "Dumbest Psionics Nerf." This one wins. Wins hard.
Tsuul 07-03-07, 06:46 PM	Spectral hand is part of the wizards soul and there is no negative level punishment when it gets destroyed. Only a few HPs. The soulknife is horidly underpowered. And this version is moreso craptacular. Ask your DM to build an overpowered soulknife without his changes to see what his problem is. Wizards dont have to buy magic weapons, neither do warlocks, clerics, or druids. "But they have to spend their money elsewhere!!!" And so does the soulknife.
Tealgorthian 07-03-07, 07:16 PM	Whiskey Tango Foxtrot Nerfing the Soulknife? Are you kidding me? This is all a sick joke, right? Play Codzilla. Stomp around. Burn buildings. Then play a Soulknife. Get your asskicked. Ask him which one is more overpowered. Yeah, you get a free magic weapon. With a limited selection of abilities. That almost all suck. Your DM failed his save against Feeblemind.
teshen 07-03-07, 08:20 PM	I think we of the Psionics Board should create an award for "Dumbest Psionics Nerf." This one wins. Wins hard. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot Nerfing the Soulknife? Are you kidding me? This is all a sick joke, right? Play Codzilla. Stomp around. Burn buildings. Then play a Soulknife. Get your asskicked. Ask him which one is more overpowered. Yeah, you get a free magic weapon. With a limited selection of abilities. That almost all suck. Your DM failed his save against Feeblemind. :rofl: And this is why I like the psionics boards... the guys who think hang out here.
Urisk 07-03-07, 09:28 PM	I think we of the Psionics Board should create an award for "Dumbest Psionics Nerf." This one wins. Wins hard. I vote for the "Golden Brick-Wall-Trophy" for the DM mentioned who obviously spent weeks smashing his head against a real brick wall. :P I'm thinking psionics grudge. That or the brick wall ... there is no third possibility. ;)
Istarion 07-03-07, 10:14 PM	...A Golden Complete Psionic may also work
Enchanter_Tom 07-03-07, 10:19 PM	...A Golden Complete Psionic may also work That might be worth purchasing.
Salla 07-03-07, 10:21 PM	At this point ... just trash the character. Whether or not you want to go CoDzilla is up to you ... but seriously, junk the character. This is the nerfiest nerf that ever nerfed a nerf.
CrimsonDeath 07-04-07, 12:40 AM	I think Vharuck did a good job of presenting plausible arguments, but I have a couple of suggestions as well. - fort. saves vs negative levels whenever my mind blade is sundered or disarmed, or if I lose it (yes, I can lose it. If I don't remember to say I demanifest the blade). Because it's part of my soul Does he realize the Fort is a bad save for the Soulknife? And what does he mean "demanifest the blade"? It goes away unless youre actively maintaining it. - will saves to half psychic strike (at least I talked him out of will none) You already have to spend a move action to charge it, and then hit the target's normal AC, and it doesn't work against undead, plants, constructs, or anyone who's magically warded against mind-affecting attacks. And it's less damage than a rogue of your level would get from a sneak attack. And he wants to put a save on top of that. - concentration checks to charge psychic strike in battle I think I have the best argument against this one. Psychic strike is a supernatural ability[/url]. From the SRD: "(S)upernatural abilities do not provoke attacks of opportunity and never require Concentration checks." Does he make the Druid make Concentration checks to Wild Shape? Does he make the Paladin make Concentration checks to Lay on Hands? Does he make the Cleric make Concentration checks to Turn Undead? If not, he shouldn't make the Soulknife make Concentration checks to charge a Psychic Strike. (Note that Supernatural abilities are generally standard actions to use [i]unless noted otherwise. Psychic Strike notes otherwise.) In exchange, I get full BAB. Help me. I don't suppose he's giving you the opportunity to forego full BAB and play the class as written?
Thomar_of_Uointer 07-04-07, 01:08 AM	I need some help proving to him that never having to spend money on a weapon does not warrant a nerf. Arguments. Good ways to prove it. I currently have to face: - fort. saves vs negative levels whenever my mind blade is sundered or disarmed, or if I lose it (yes, I can lose it. If I don't remember to say I demanifest the blade). Because it's part of my soul - reflex saves dropped to poor, because there's no reason for it to be good - will saves to half psychic strike (at least I talked him out of will none) - concentration checks to charge psychic strike in battle In exchange, I get full BAB. Help me. P.S. Sorry if I don't get back. The next 48 hours I may have a hard time getting to a computer. I'll be back after that. :uh-huh: Tell your DM that the soulknife is horrible compared to a monk of the same race and level in all cases (due to its lack of defensive abilities). If that doesn't work, play a druid.
Crimson_Concerto 07-04-07, 01:14 AM	*reads topic title* It's possible for the Soulknife to be more worthless than it already is? :confused: *reads rest of topic* :eek: :OMG! *dies* :ghosted: But seriously, this has got to be one of the stupidest nerfs I've ever seen in all my time of playing D&D. Your DM's concept of class balance is... I don't even think there's a word for something containing that much phailure. :confused: Anyways, he has no idea what he's doing, and if anything, from what well-informed testimonial I've heard, he should consider giving you the BAB boost without taking anything away at all.
Rhonin the Big 07-04-07, 01:30 AM	I have a simple solution that doesn't involve arguing with the DM who happens to be your friend, or unleasing CoDzilla on your DM/friend's game which is ten times ruder than raping his sister on the steps of a church, wanna hear it? Don't play a soulknife!
sooperspook 07-04-07, 02:06 AM	I have a simple solution that doesn't involve arguing with the DM who happens to be your friend, or unleasing CoDzilla on your DM/friend's game which is ten times ruder than raping his sister on the steps of a church, wanna hear it? Don't play a soulknife! I have a better idea. Don't make unwarranted and idiotic nerfs to already weak classes!
Crimson_Concerto 07-04-07, 02:19 AM	Don't play a soulknife!Barring the ridiculous DM Elitism mentality, he's completely within his rights to want to play an allowed class and have it not suck worse than it already does by default...
Scion of Coldshard 07-04-07, 02:46 AM	In exchange, I get full BAB. Help me. Thats it? I have a list of further modifications ;) Current changes: -Fort save or gain a negative level when mindblade is sundered (the rest of it was nonsensical so I am ignoring it). What is the DC for this anyway? I would suggest the DC to be the amount of damage dealt over the amount it took to destroy it or gain 1 negative level for 1 hour. -Poor reflex save -Psychic strike changes -Full BAB Modify the rogue variant (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#rogue)and trade out your psychic strike for some amount of bonus psionic feats. Lets make it easy, one bonus psionic feat at first level, 3rd, and every 3 levels after that (7 total). Reduce hd to d6. Gain 2 extra skill points a level. Poor will save. Lose shield proficiency. Add charisma bonus to AC while in light armor and not using a shield (level 2). Add charisma bonus to all saves (level 4). Add charisma damage to damage while flanking (level 6). Flurry like a monk of 2 levels lower but only with mind blade (level 3). Ability to gain a psicrystal without meeting the normal prereqs (level 10). There we go, that looks pretty good now ;) Edit: If the dm feels that this is too much (ha) then perhaps the class should have full BAB but if you use any weapon other than the mind blade your BAB is effectively cut in half for that weapon.
calronmoonflower 07-04-07, 03:58 AM	Try this. http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g111/Lycanthromancer/codzilla.jpg
forsaken1111 07-04-07, 04:05 AM	I have an even better idea... Link your DM to this thread so he can see how much of a retard we all think he is for suggesting something so rediculous. Honestly, lets nerf one of the few classes which is weaker than a straight fighter or monk. Come on...
CrimsonDeath 07-04-07, 06:24 AM	Well, I'm not sure that's such a good idea, as much as people have been throwing around words like "retard"...
forsaken1111 07-04-07, 06:26 AM	Well, I'm not sure that's such a good idea, as much as people have been throwing around words like "retard"... If he acts a certain way, he gets labeled a certain way.
Tealgorthian 07-04-07, 08:51 AM	Well, I'm not sure that's such a good idea, as much as people have been throwing around words like "retard"... If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then it must be a duck? I mean.. seriously. Make a Soulknife at each of the benchmark levels (1, 5, 10, 15, 20) and make a similar class in nature (Monk, Ranger, Rogue even) and compare their abilities. If he insists on the nerfs, I wouldnt even play in his game. He sounds like he just wants to sunder magic weapons and put you on the DM's Plot Line is More Importent than the Characters Express, running straight to Sucktown.
Rhonin the Big 07-04-07, 11:55 AM	If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then it must be a duck? I mean.. seriously. Make a Soulknife at each of the benchmark levels (1, 5, 10, 15, 20) and make a similar class in nature (Monk, Ranger, Rogue even) and compare their abilities. If he insists on the nerfs, I wouldnt even play in his game. He sounds like he just wants to sunder magic weapons and put you on the DM's Plot Line is More Importent than the Characters Express, running straight to Sucktown. I agree that the soulknife is already pretty gimped, but to leave your friend's creative work behind just because of a bad housrule (and I've seen my fair share of crap houserules from some of my best friends) is alot more difficult than leaving behind a character concept. Sometimes DMs are hard to come by, sometimes people just wanna play the game and not make it. Barring the ridiculous DM Elitism mentality, he's completely within his rights to want to play an allowed class and have it not suck worse than it already does by default... No he isn't, the players have no right to anything the DM does not explicitly allow. If this is the soulknife in his game then he has no right to forcefully incist upon change. The OP could simply leave the game (which I dont recommend because I assume the DM is your friend) or play a different class that didn't get the complete psionics treatment. If it's such a travesty to the psionic community simply talk to your DM about it in a calm, friendly and unargumentative manner, be sure to link to the psionic mythbuster threads (but not this one) and if he doesn't let up play a different class. Do NOT play CoDzilla because breaking your friend's creative work is the rudest thing ever.
NoldorForce 07-04-07, 12:36 PM	No he isn't, the players have no right to anything the DM does not explicitly allow. If this is the soulknife in his game then he has no right to forcefully incist upon change. The OP could simply leave the game (which I dont recommend because I assume the DM is your friend) or play a different class that didn't get the complete psionics treatment. If it's such a travesty to the psionic community simply talk to your DM about it in a calm, friendly and unargumentative manner, be sure to link to the psionic mythbuster threads (but not this one) and if he doesn't let up play a different class. Do NOT play CoDzilla because breaking your friend's creative work is the rudest thing ever.Likely the best advice I've seen here. PLaying a CoDzilla character is rude at best unless you're trying to prove a point and your DM knows it. For instance, there was the thread that spawned that term; eventually the OP in that thread ended up playing a druid expressly to belie the DM's claims. The DM knew this and let that poster play a druid for those very reasons. But this isn't happening here. Alternatively, the OP could ask to play the soulknife as written. The DM had apparently considered the original version to be balanced, and it's notably less gimped than the modified version.
CrimsonDeath 07-04-07, 12:48 PM	the complete psionics treatment Heh... I'm gonna have to use that one later.
Rhonin the Big 07-04-07, 12:54 PM	Likely the best advice I've seen here. PLaying a CoDzilla character is rude at best unless you're trying to prove a point and your DM knows it. For instance, there was the thread that spawned that term; eventually the OP in that thread ended up playing a druid expressly to belie the DM's claims. The DM knew this and let that poster play a druid for those very reasons. But this isn't happening here. Playing CoDzilla to prove that psionix/Tome of Magic/Tome of Battle/Magic of Incarnum/The Warlock/whatever new magic system that WoTC ***** out is balanced just doesn't work: "Hi, I'm Coddy McCoddingson the cleric. I have better attack and damage rolls than the party fighter with my longspear, my blasting spells and save-or-dies are more potent than the wizard and I don't need move silently or hide when I can shapechange into an invisible stalker. I am a one-man wreaking machine and there's nothing you can put me up against of the appropriate CR to my level that can stand a chance against me. Now do you understand that psionics is balanced? Oh noes, I'm imploding! AHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!1111!!onehundredand eleven *player gets thrown out of the house never to be seen again*
Crimson_Concerto 07-04-07, 01:13 PM	No he isn't, the players have no right to anything the DM does not explicitly allow.And that right there is the DM Elitism mentality I was talking about... so I guess I proved my point. :) If this is the soulknife in his game then he has no right to forcefully incist upon change.Of course he does. Again, barring the DM Elitism mentality, the players have just as much right to tell the DM what they want to do as the the DM has to tell the players what he wants them to do. The important thing is that they compromise so that everybody cna have fun. No, the DM is not always right, and when players see that, they have every right to call the DM out on it if their fun is in jeopardy because of it. The OP could simply leave the game (which I dont recommend because I assume the DM is your friend)Agreed. Leaving is almost never a good idea when there are still so many alternatives to explore. or play a different class that didn't get the complete psionics treatment.So true. :P If it's such a travesty to the psionic community simply talk to your DM about it in a calm, friendly and unargumentative manner,That's exactly what we want him to do. Tell him DM that he is making a mistake because of the reasons we've listed. We're trying to give him a hand with showing his DM that major flaws in his thinking. Also, this isn't a "psionic community" thing. You don't need to be a psionics fanboy to understand what is and is not balanced. be sure to link to the psionic mythbuster threads (but not this one)I didn't think that had Soulknife stuff in it? :confused: and if he doesn't let up play a different class.EDIT: Ignore this paragraph, I'm having trouble organizing my thoughts for this response. I'll come fill it back in later... Do NOT play CoDzilla because breaking your friend's creative work is the rudest thing ever.Again, I agree. However, I will note that by imposing this absurd Soulknife nerf, the DM is breaking the player's creative work, which can be just as rude. Now, back on the subject of sending your DM to this thread. It would be okay to do so as long as he understands one thing: We don't know him. He may be a very intelligent person with a sparkling personality for all we know, but have we seen that? No, the only thing we have here to consider about this person is that he thinks this Soul Knife nerf is a good idea. We know this is wrong, and as other people have pointed out, the idea is stupid and retarded, not the person, but the idea. The people who say the DM is the one who is stupid and retarded are ONLY making that assumption based on the fact that the DM had a stupid/retarded idea, and nothing more. So long as your DM is mature enough to understand the difference and how internet reasoning works, showing him the thread might not be a bad idea.
Minmaximus 07-04-07, 01:38 PM	Heck, I just give the sk full bab with no other changes, in the hopes that someone will play it. Just cause I wanna see one
forsaken1111 07-04-07, 02:29 PM	I think the point is... DM nerfing soulknife because they suck due to something in his campaign/storyline/world is okay. DM nerfing soulknife because "psionics is teh suk and soulknif R broken!1!!" is not okay. In fact, it sounds to me like the DM in question didn't make any attempt to understand how craptastic the class is once he heard "weapon for free" and focused on that single aspect of the class. Off topic but: The variant soulknife in untapped potential is so much nicer. It doesn't change a lot but the weapon progression is closer to what an equal level character would be equipped with, and they get bonus feats. No full BAB but hey, its cool. I was saddened when my friend, after playing his soulknife through 10 levels, broke down and put his mindblade away using the +3 flaming longsword we found because it really was better for him than his +2 mindblade. The 'free' weapon simply doesn't keep up with good gear unless you're playing a very treasure-poor campaign. Edit: For comparison, I just went and looked. A level 10 variant soulknife would actually have up to a +4 mindblade enhancement so he would actually equal my example of a +3 flaming sword. Interesting, but unintentional. The variant soulknife loses speed of thought but gains bonus psionic feats which make the class MUCH more customizable. You could go the way of a frontline combatant or the way of the stealthy assassin. I'm actually drawing up a character using this variant plus the psychic acrobat prestige class right now.
Tealgorthian 07-04-07, 02:36 PM	Rhonin, I'm sorry, but the DM is NOT more important than the players. Period. The DM would be just a screwed as if no players showed up to his games. I DM. I would never screw-over my friend's character. I'd give it a chance as it is, with the caveat that I can make retroactive changes later. If I wanted to leave a game my friend was running, and I have, I'd simply say "Well, I had this concept for a character. But you don't like it for some reason. So I am gonna sit this one out." He said "Well, I'd hate for you to do that, let's see what we can do it fix it." When he realized that I was considering not playing because of some stupid houserule (this was in 2e.. I don't even remember what the houserule was. Perhaps it was the "banning all magic BUT psionics phase) he made a compromise with me. If your DM really is your friend, he should be willing to do that. If he isn't willing, perhaps someone else in your group needs to take up the mantle of DM. DM's give the players a world to play in. But the players give the DM something to interact with. Both are essential to the game. DMs are not, and will never be, more important than the players. I DM from the approach that I am here to give the players a good time. Not myself. I usually enjoy myself in the process, however. If my players want a high optimized, mix/maxed all to hell and back game, I give them that. If they want something a little more laid back, I give them that. If they suddenly deside that they want an all social interaction game, I will change things to make it as close as I can.
Archtyrant Terevoth 07-04-07, 03:30 PM	Rhonin, I'm sorry, but the DM is NOT more important than the players. Period. The DM would be just a screwed as if no players showed up to his games. Well, here's the issue. The game can suffer the loss of a player can keep going. The game cannot suffer the loss of the DM, at least not without getting a new DM. This makes the DM position much more important and valuable.
NoldorForce 07-04-07, 03:30 PM	Rhonin was correct in that the players have no right to forcibly insist on change. They can insist on change, but that doesn't give them a right to walk over the DM. Similarly, the role of the DM as arbiter does not give him the right to walk over the players. Just because he has the potential to flail about with the nerf bat (as this DM seems to have unintentionally done here), doesn't mean that he should or that the players should condone it. Rhonin's advice was better than much of the other stuff because it wasn't nearly as outrageous. There were insults (the word "retard" was used here), calls of "dumbest nerf ever", suggestions of CoDzilla, and so forth. There was some decent advice at the beginning, but within the last thirty entries it's mostly been bunk. Granted, the DM in question seems to be inexperienced in terms of determining balance. Full BAB isn't as great as it seems compared to fair (+3/4 per level) BAB, once you consider the ways of getting full BAB anyway (Divine Power) or not having to care (spellcasting or natural weapons). And the introduced costs have potentially double the magnitude of effect as the BAB change. But that's not an invitation to stomp in with CoDzilla, but rather an opportunity to demonstrate what problems there are. The solution to most bizarre houserules and similar problems is simply to talk it over with your DM. If the two (or more) of you come to some sort of agreement, great. If not, then you can either find some way to not have to care (playing a different class, for instance) or just not play (as with the "nerfiest campaign ever"*). But being confrontational is just as bad for the players as for the DM. *The "nerfiest campaign ever" (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=259802) was from a thread discussing a campaign with incredible amounts of railroading, NPCs with a power level of Higher Than You, and DM laziness. Most campaigns would likely not reach that point unless people actively attempted to get there.
turalisj 07-04-07, 03:44 PM	Reasons . . . he didn't like not having to spend a copper on weaponry. Especially with the good starting gold. Further, he argued that the original soulknife was published after officially being edited and playtested, so it was supposedly balanced. He had to compensate for "improving" it by giving it better BAB. I thought I had talked him out his viewpoint on psionics. Something about "damn powergamers and their psionics." I thought since I had convinced him to give it a try we were past that. I'll see if I can get that battle with the ranger. I just hope the ranger will actually sunder or disarm, to help prove how bad that :censored:ing negative level rule is. That's the one I hate most. Even if it is flavorful. Can we say 3.0 psionic combat? Step 1: Take Shotgun Step 2: Aim Shotgun Step 3: Fire Shotgun.
Tealgorthian 07-04-07, 03:54 PM	Well, here's the issue. The game can suffer the loss of a player can keep going. The game cannot suffer the loss of the DM, at least not without getting a new DM. This makes the DM position much more important and valuable. You think so? I'd hate to play in your games then. The players are the focus of D&D. The DM is there to enable their gaming experience. I've seen entire groups fall apart because one player walked. Whereas, when my DM walked, I merely picked up DMing for him. DMs are NOT special. They do not get special treatment. Everyone always talks about how the DMs word goes, and all that crap. Well, it is crap. A DM with that attitude will find himself without a group. I've seen it happen. I've been part of it happening. When a DM starts tossing around bizzare nerfs, houserules, and anything else in the name of flavor, ignoring balance implications, they are not fit to be a DM. Flavor does not trump fun, or game balance. Ever. These nerfs are stupid. That's it. The nerfs are implace for no reason, other than "its seem intersting". I read that as "Its fun to screw over your character, and in the process, you!" If the DM won't stop doing it, talk to the other player, then walk. Its a game. It isnt worth the time it takes to agrue over it. If you aren't happy, then show him comparitive power levels, like I suggested (CoDZilla VS Soulknife). If he insists on the nerfs, leave. You won't be happy in that game anyway.
forsaken1111 07-04-07, 04:11 PM	I think the suggestion to ask him what he'll do about the monk is a good one. They do get d20 damage for free, and lots of attacks! Also, mages with the magic weapon spell can make a magic weapon free! Oh noes! better nerf em...
Fafnir 07-04-07, 04:24 PM	I think the suggestion to ask him what he'll do about the monk is a good one. They do get d20 damage for free, and lots of attacks! That's 2d10, actually. :teach:
forsaken1111 07-04-07, 04:55 PM	That's 2d10, actually. :teach: So it is! I don't play monks often. :D
Scion of Coldshard 07-04-07, 05:07 PM	So it is! I don't play monks often. :D And with a single feat that becomes 4d8! ;) Take that soulknife!
IceFractal 07-04-07, 05:34 PM	Wow, the Soulknife is broken huh? The soulknife, one of the weakest* classes, whose class features can largely be replaced with items, is broken. This just show why attempting to balance stuff "by feel", without a mechanical understanding and actual experience of how things work in play, is pretty much like trying to guess which mushrooms are poisonous by how they taste. *Not that it's worthless, the mindblade is a cool concept, but "having a sword" is not much of a class feature, strength-wise.
Urisk 07-04-07, 06:21 PM	DM nerfing soulknife because "psionics is teh suk and soulknif R broken!1!!" is not okay. In fact, it sounds to me like the DM in question didn't make any attempt to understand how craptastic the class is once he heard "weapon for free" and focused on that single aspect of the class. Well, yeah. I know people who think everything psionic which can not be done with arcane / divine magic is automatically broken because arcane / divine magic defines the framework of what is allowed to exist in the D&D universe. (Yes, I'm serious!) Mostly they are anti-psionic guys that 'accept' ( / pretend to accept) psionics as long as they only do things that can be done the same way or better by a mage or cleric. My suggestion would be: Instead of trying to 'tell' him why the soulknife is not unbalanced write it down, print it and hand it to him personally on a sheet of paper or send him a mail. It is absolutely obvious, that your DM [@OP] is anti-psionic at least to a certain degree. The evaluation written by you with page numbers in brackets pointing to each important piece of text if he wants to check it is the way with the least pressure and least effort for your DM to get to know the class without having to touch the accursed book too much which has the power word of utmost evil (Psionics) printed on its cover. ;)
Azzy 07-04-07, 09:17 PM	Question: What do you call a DM that nerfs the soulknife class and insists that it is overpowered? Answer: Someone that shouldn't be allowed to DM because he obviously has no grasp on the rules or what is or is not balanced. Or, alternately.... Answer: Stupid.
TheCobra 07-04-07, 09:59 PM	I'm new to 3.5 psionics. When I started reading the soulknife description, I assumed they got some powers. Then I saw that they didn't. I don't understand why anyone would want to nerf this class. On the other hand, full base attack bonus sounds kind of nice. I bet you could give the soulknife that and d8 hit dice without making it at all overpowered.
forsaken1111 07-04-07, 10:04 PM	I'm new to 3.5 psionics. When I started reading the soulknife description, I assumed they got some powers. Then I saw that they didn't. I don't understand why anyone would want to nerf this class. On the other hand, full base attack bonus sounds kind of nice. I bet you could give the soulknife that and d8 hit dice without making it at all overpowered. True, but the class was obviously intended to be a stealthy fighter type, not a frontline melee combat class. Look at its class skills...
turalisj 07-04-07, 10:06 PM	You mean skills that people want fighters to have?
TheCobra 07-04-07, 10:13 PM	I'm amazed that the soulknife really doesn't get anything other than a magic sword. Thinking about it some more, just giving it full base attack bonus seems fine. Dropping to d8 hit dice isn't needed. Having full BAB doesn't make you front-line melee fighter.
forsaken1111 07-04-07, 10:18 PM	I'm amazed that the soulknife really doesn't get anything other than a magic sword. Thinking about it some more, just giving it full base attack bonus seems fine. Dropping to d8 hit dice isn't needed. Having full BAB doesn't make you front-line melee fighter. There are a ton of soulknife fixes on these boards. Some include full BAB. Here's two that I personally like: http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=12223450 http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=837114
Omnirahk, half-Rahkshi 07-05-07, 02:35 PM	Well, I'm back. And I did talk to the DM. We compromised. Sort of. Somehow or other the DM did get a hold of the feat Ascetic Soulknife from here on the boards. He's ok with it. And since it alters the mind blade to just improve unarmed strikes, it can't be sundered or disarmed. Or lost. So no more fort saves to avoid negative levels. That's his thinking. So I can suck less if I play a soulknife/monk. He's even willing to allow retraining. That's an exception to his usual rule. He says he'll explain it as some side effect of my resurrection. Yup, I died. Anyone surprised? But the rules stay the same. I'm just allowed to multiclass and take a feat to avoid some of the problems. As for DMing, yeah, this group has a problem. We've yet to find a satisfactory one. The last one threw an iron golem with a greathammer (MM4 p. 101) grafted on at a group of 3 1st level characters. Previously the group disintegrated from lost interest (which would be my turn:().
TheCobra 07-05-07, 02:42 PM	The last one threw an iron golem with a greathammer (MM4 p. 101) grafted on at a group of 3 1st level characters. :eek: I hope they ran away as fast as they could.
Archtyrant Terevoth 07-05-07, 02:54 PM	I've seen entire groups fall apart because one player walked. Whereas, when my DM walked, I merely picked up DMing for him. Well if you pick up DMing you still lose the majority of the old DM's story and are effectively starting a new campaign with the same characters. Also the fact that you are now a DM means you can't be a player, meaning that loss of the DM has caused significantly more upheaval to the game than the loss of a PC, which just means that the party continues its quest down one member. I mean hell, just consider what happens if a PC doesn't show up for a game session. Everyone else keeps playing. If the DM doesn't show, then there is no session. As far as groups falling apart because of one player, this is largely more a popularity issue than an issue of player/DM roles. DMs are NOT special. They do not get special treatment. Everyone always talks about how the DMs word goes, and all that crap. Well, it is crap. Yeah... cause you know, DMs don't control everything in the world that isn't a PC. They don't make final decisions and adjudications on rules... and they don't create stories, adventures and settings for the PCs to play in. In fact, DMs don't do any more work than the average PC... Oh wait. they do. When a DM starts tossing around bizzare nerfs, houserules, and anything else in the name of flavor, ignoring balance implications, they are not fit to be a DM. Flavor does not trump fun, or game balance. Ever. Whether a nerf is correct or not doesn't change the DM's importance to the game. In fact, the very idea that a bad DM can make a gaming experience terrible only further reinforces the idea that the DM really is that important. Most people confuse "the DM can do anything" with "the DM is always right". The former is true, the latter is not. Being the conduit to the game, DMs do have absolute power so long as they have players. These nerfs are stupid. That's it. Oh, I agree. These soulknife nerfs are terrible and unnecessary. Of course, that still doesn't change the fact that the DM has the power in this situation. The DM can if he wants, put his foot down and say that the nerfs stick and if the PC doesn't like it, his only choices are to live with the changes or not play.
Omnirahk, half-Rahkshi 07-05-07, 03:15 PM	Of course, that still doesn't change the fact that the DM has the power in this situation. The DM can if he wants, put his foot down and say that the nerfs stick and if the PC doesn't like it, his only choices are to live with the changes or not play. Which is basically what happened. With the exception that the worst go away if I multiclass into monk and take a feat.
turalisj 07-05-07, 03:39 PM	Tealgorthian- I would hate to DM any game you would be in. From what you posted, you sound like the kind of player every DM tries to keep out of his game. From what you've posted, you have absolutely no respect for your DM, and consider him a piece of crap.
Melayl 07-05-07, 03:53 PM	Tealgorthian- I would hate to DM any game you would be in. Hmm. From what he posted, he seems like the kind of player I'd like to have in my games. (and yes, I do DM -- all the time, actually) Also, you can play and DM at the same time (yes, I know, different thread, and loaded with very strong polar opinions. Try it, you might like it).
Fafnir 07-05-07, 04:05 PM	Tealgorthian- I would hate to DM any game you would be in. From what you posted, you sound like the kind of player every DM tries to keep out of his game. From what you've posted, you have absolutely no respect for your DM, and consider him a piece of crap. I dunno... he was pretty harsh, but overall I agreed with most of the post. And I'm the DM in my group. A friend of mine used to say: "There are three people in a relationship. Me, you, and us. And unless everyone's happy, it's not going to last long." While a DM shouldn't come after the players, he certainly does not come before. EDIT: Ninja'ed by Melayl. Well, at least we understand each other. And of course you can both play and DM, that's what Schism is for.
Rageheart 07-05-07, 04:12 PM	Seconded Fafnir. when I DM: ... I'm there for the player's entertainment. (it is a game after all) When I play: ... I'm there for my co-players. (and it doesn't do much good to scream at the heavens "Why Me!?")
Omnirahk, half-Rahkshi 07-05-07, 04:13 PM	There are a ton of soulknife fixes on these boards. Some include full BAB. Here's two that I personally like: http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=12223450 http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=837114 I like the second one. It's definitely one of my top favorite soulknife fixes. The other one being the sublime way soulknife. Contributing to current discussion: yes, I have no problem with playing and DMing in the same game. However, it's an advanced tactic. At the very least, it's part of why my DMing stint failed.
CrimsonDeath 07-05-07, 04:26 PM	Whether a nerf is correct or not doesn't change the DM's importance to the game. In fact, the very idea that a bad DM can make a gaming experience terrible only further reinforces the idea that the DM really is that important. In my experience, a bad player can make gaming just as unenjoyable as a bad DM. I like the second one. It's definitely one of my top favorite soulknife fixes. The other one being the sublime way soulknife. There's a Sublime Way Soulknife? Link?
Azzy 07-05-07, 04:50 PM	I dunno... he was pretty harsh, but overall I agreed with most of the post. And I'm the DM in my group. A friend of mine used to say: "There are three people in a relationship. Me, you, and us. And unless everyone's happy, it's not going to last long." While a DM shouldn't come after the players, he certainly does not come before. Quoted for everliving truth.
Red_Decker 07-05-07, 05:09 PM	Well, I'm back. And I did talk to the DM. We compromised. Sort of. Somehow or other the DM did get a hold of the feat Ascetic Soulknife from here on the boards. He's ok with it. And since it alters the mind blade to just improve unarmed strikes, it can't be sundered or disarmed. Or lost. So no more fort saves to avoid negative levels. That's his thinking. So I can suck less if I play a soulknife/monk. He's even willing to allow retraining. That's an exception to his usual rule. He says he'll explain it as some side effect of my resurrection. Yup, I died. Anyone surprised? But the rules stay the same. I'm just allowed to multiclass and take a feat to avoid some of the problems. As for DMing, yeah, this group has a problem. We've yet to find a satisfactory one. The last one threw an iron golem with a greathammer (MM4 p. 101) grafted on at a group of 3 1st level characters. Previously the group disintegrated from lost interest (which would be my turn:(). In my expierence patience is a virtue. If you still wanna play a SK and don't wanna go the monk road just keep playing the SK, after about the third or fourth time you die from unneeded and unneccisary nerfs hopefully he'll give in and let you play as the class was intended. http://www.geocities.com/customsmiliesbyswordmaster/inthered.txt
Rhonin the Big 07-05-07, 05:32 PM	When one of my 4 fellow players don't show up the party loses a ****-load of its offense and could possibly die. In a ECL20 game we had an encounter with 2 advanced Ironclad Maulers (MM3, the one with Sparkman), only 3 players showed up and 2 of them were our weakest characters ... needless to say we were all killed. In return to the temple of elemental evil (ecl4) I was the cleric and I didn't show up and the rest of the party almost got killed. A week after the cyborg bears the DM caught pneumonia (I told him not to buy Frostburn!), so we all had a giant PvP rumble at my house and then we hung out for awhile. I'm not saying players are more important, in my campaigns when either one don't show up people end up dying.
Lazigothi 07-05-07, 05:34 PM	Here's another case of having DM Q. http://www.crystalinks.com/qstartrek.jpg I am the DM, and this is MY world, where I make the rules. I could be fair, but I want to win, and winning is fun, so I will make everything completely unfair. A DM does have authority, does arbitrate, does create the story background, etc., but the DM's primary obligation is to secure fun for everyone, which flies against the idea of the "love it or leave it" attitude. I think such a DM has chronic "control" issues, loves to throw words around like "broken," "banned," "low magic," and "no psionics." The DM isn't concerned about story so much as not being able to cope with creative players. I recall one DM who once told a player, "Don't do that. . . please don't make me hit you." The player was disobeying a railroaded plot, choosing instead to actually roleplay his character (and well, I thought). Then the DM took his water bottle and actually smacked the player hard across his face. The DM and player were both in the late 20's early 30's. What should be at stake: will any compromise also compromise the DM's or player's enjoyment of the game? Has the DM been informed about the myth about Psionics thread or about this thread, specifically? It seems that the compromise this DM decided on still seems rather ineffectual. It sounds frustrating to also deal with the hassle of resurrection penalties on top of this. The DM has nerfed the character class, severely, and consequently the character has died, and now the player's new class combo must continue to pay the penalty for the DM's own shortsightedness, fear, and paranoia? If the DM hasn't seen this death as evidence of brutally hamstringing the already weak Soulknife, does this DM have the capacity for reason? I've come across DM's more intimidated by far more powerful threats than a psionically manifested weapon freebie, that this DM seems unbelievable to me. The Soulknife has nothing else of consequence. Out of all of the myriad of other classes, as a DM, I have the least amount of concern about being walked all over by a Soulknife.
Omnirahk, half-Rahkshi 07-05-07, 06:08 PM	There's a Sublime Way Soulknife? Link? "Yet Another Soulknife Fix" (http://boards1.wizards.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-702973). One of my faves.
Archtyrant Terevoth 07-05-07, 06:19 PM	A DM does have authority, does arbitrate, does create the story background, etc., but the DM's primary obligation is to secure fun for everyone, which flies against the idea of the "love it or leave it" attitude. I think such a DM has chronic "control" issues, loves to throw words around like "broken," "banned," "low magic," and "no psionics." The DM isn't concerned about story so much as not being able to cope with creative players. I recall one DM who once told a player, "Don't do that. . . please don't make me hit you." The player was disobeying a railroaded plot, choosing instead to actually roleplay his character (and well, I thought). Keep in mind that nerfs have nothing to do with railroading. Railroading is about having a static plot of which the PCs have little ability to influence. Changing the rules is something entirely different. The purpose of changing the rules is to either: -Fix a perceived imbalance between classes, so that some PCs aren't overshadowed and everyone has more fun. -Add flavor to the world, or emphasize certain tactics. You may for instance, ban transportation spells, like flight, if you want travel to be a major part of the game. This goes to telling a specific kind of story. -Remove a particularly overpowered or cheesy tactic or combo because it makes the game either stupid or not fun.
aotrscommander 07-05-07, 06:36 PM	... ... ... Nerf the Soulknife? ... ... Nerf the Soulknife?! ... Bu-...Wha...Keh? ... Excuse me, I suddenly feel the urge to plunge my skull into antimatter. ...As far as fixes go, I thing BlaineTog's is pretty awesome (link's in my sig). Nerf the Soulknife?
Omnirahk, half-Rahkshi 07-05-07, 06:58 PM	... ... ... Nerf the Soulknife? ... ... Nerf the Soulknife?! ... Bu-...Wha...Keh? ... Excuse me, I suddenly feel the urge to plunge my skull into antimatter. ...As far as fixes go, I thing BlaineTog's is pretty awesome (link's in my sig). Nerf the Soulknife? Yeah, that was my response too. Then I laughed. Then I realized he was serious. Then I resisted the urge to laugh some more. Then I shared it here. And laughed some more . . . that probably doesn't say good things about my alignment, does it? Anyway, I'm not horribly sad at being forced to multiclass as a monk. Heck, I've been trying to build my own soulknife fix making it into the psionic equivalent of the monk. It hasn't been going so well, but I've got a chance to play with the concept.
Nifft 07-05-07, 07:54 PM	DM: "I'm going to nerf non-Core thingy X." Player: "Fine, I'll just play a Druid (or Cleric)." Make him see what broken actually looks like. (If you're feeling vengeful.) Otherwise, play a Cleric or Druid because they're fun to play. :) Cheers, -- N
forsaken1111 07-05-07, 08:00 PM	Yeah, play a planar shepherd.
Omnirahk, half-Rahkshi 07-05-07, 08:29 PM	Yeah, play a planar shepherd. I have been interested in an Adar human planar shepherd (Dal Quor). Who suffers from a quori envy problem. Neat concept. Here would be a chance to try it. Or would if it were an Eberron game . . . I don't think I'll ever actually get to try it out. But it was such a neat character concept. :(
Meep326 07-05-07, 09:11 PM	Didn't read it all, but to all those saying play a druid try this instead: Play the druid variant from UA the one that gets monk and ranger abilities, the Superior Unarmed Strike feat from Book of the Nine Swords, and Fist of the Forest. At 20, 2d6 unarmed damage, possibly getting a boost from Fist of the Forest; dex, wis, and con to AC; full spell casting; fast movement (as monk); favored enemy (as ranger); and a handfull of other abilities. And you can easily qualifiy for duelist to get int to AC for a one level dip.
Tealgorthian 07-06-07, 12:24 AM	Tealgorthian- I would hate to DM any game you would be in. From what you posted, you sound like the kind of player every DM tries to keep out of his game. From what you've posted, you have absolutely no respect for your DM, and consider him a piece of crap. Um. No. I consider a DM that treats me like a second-rate citizen a peice of crap. I DM just as often as I play. If your player respects your game, he will not play horridly broken class/race/etc, espically if he is your friend. If your DM respects your playing skills, and knows you respect his game, he will not say "no" to something because he feels like it, doesn't like the flavor, or whathaveyou. Flavor can be changed. Small mechanical changes can be made. Revamping a whole class, stomping a mudhole in it, then kicking it dry because you lack basic reasoning skills/cognative function/(insertalternatemagicsystem/Tome of Battle) hate makes you a bad DM. But it sounds like I wouldn't want you for a player anyway, so we're good, huh? Archtyrant - Perhaps you are missing my overall point. If the DMs and players have mutual respect for one-another then they can come up with a solution both parties are happy with. A good, respectful, player will never ask you "Can I play a Kobold that shapeshifts into this monster that can steal other abilities?" or "Can I play a Hulking Hurler?" (Unless they are unaware of the mechnical problems with those classes, then they should back down after you explain why). Which is why I have never had to bad a single class, feat, race, Prestige Class, or alternate magic system. I have had to ask for a little time to work it into an exsisting game, but I've never outright banned it. I hate Magic of Incarnum. I think its merely different for the sake of selling a book. Same with the Tome of Magic. But I wouldn't tell a player they couldn't play something out of it. I trust my players to know what is overpowered and what isn't. And I have yet to have a single problem. Well. Personality conflicts happen, but you know, a problem with a character :P
turalisj 07-06-07, 12:29 AM	Revamping a whole class, stomping a mudhole in it, then kicking it dry because you lack basic reasoning skills/cognative function/(insertalternatemagicsystem/Tome of Battle) hate makes you a bad DM. Never said I wasn't against nerfing the soulknife. Heck, I've never played a straight soulknife (always multiclassed in warmind, pyrokineticist, or more recently illuminated soul or mind bow) because there's not much there to it. But lets not turn this into an argument about player styles, m'kay?
backstabbist 07-06-07, 12:52 AM	wow The DM wants to nerf it just over not spending gold on weapons? Dont let him see the Kensei, his head would explode. Actually, take SoulK till you can get Kensei, after a few levels of that show him what a No Gold weapon really is
turalisj 07-06-07, 01:00 AM	Monk with levels in Kensei.... :P
kyeudo 07-06-07, 10:20 AM	Kensai Monks get +5 Keen Vorpal Fists!!! A soulknife's mind blade compared to that is like a candle compared to a campfire.
backstabbist 07-06-07, 11:40 AM	Why not meet your GM halfway on the sunder Save or Lose Level: Buy each psiknife with a few XP like the Kensei, and repay for sunders (not lost, that is silly) What does that DM do with all the lost Psiknives that are floating around his world? How much is a +2Flaming Psiknife (lost by some SK) for rogues & wizards to buy? Immune to rust or heatmetal, easy to hide, weighs nothing.. what do the folks that find these lost psiknives do with them? If he wants to give full BAB, take 5 levels of SoulKnife (4skill/lvl) and then 5levels of Kensei. At 10th level you would have a +5 value weapon, and at 15th level you'd have a +10 value weapon (the 4th SK +1 wont stack with the Kensie stuff).... or for real fun, 5th SK Shape/split the +10 Psiknife into 2x +9 PsiShortswords in the words of Ronco Now how much would you pay? But wait, theres more....
Fleem 07-06-07, 01:09 PM	Hey, would you have to take negative levels ever time you used the class ability, "Throw mind blade"? After all, you've just disarmed yourself. ROFL.
Lazigothi 07-06-07, 02:20 PM	Keep in mind that nerfs have nothing to do with railroading. Railroading is about having a static plot of which the PCs have little ability to influence. Changing the rules is something entirely different. The purpose of changing the rules is to either: -Fix a perceived imbalance between classes, so that some PCs aren't overshadowed and everyone has more fun. -Add flavor to the world, or emphasize certain tactics. You may for instance, ban transportation spells, like flight, if you want travel to be a major part of the game. This goes to telling a specific kind of story. -Remove a particularly overpowered or cheesy tactic or combo because it makes the game either stupid or not fun. That was taken into consideration with my post. I implied that a bad DM carries over into other areas of "my way or the highway" attitude. I think Tealgorthian has a good point. With a good group, the DM trusts players, and players aren't hellbent on disrupting the game. I think a DM that nerfs, or bans something with flawed logic, paranoia, lack of knowledge, and a round-the-table discussion on something is a DM Q. "Because I said so," should not be the end of discussion. I think in a sincerely honest and good group, a DM won't be intimidated by having a topic up for discussion. Let's use your example of banning teleport. I think if a DM explains the world as one where travel by other means makes-or-breaks the ambience and mood of the campaign setting (maybe it's an island setting, or it's a vast expanse of desert or ice or lava), and not out of outright fear of not being able to counter the abilities of players, then players wanting to play the campaign should understand and accept this ruling. The players should have an equal trust in the DM likewise forbidding teleport from all NPC's and magic items. Teleport does not exist, period, for anyone or anything. If it's banning something from the splatbook, the DM should be first well informed about what the banned item does and likewise explain to the player that the flavor wouldn't mix and not because the DM has a "vs. the Players" attitude when designing encounters. Many of us who love Psionics are frequently annoyed by DM's dissmissively banning the XPHB without even reading it and having gross misunderstandings. They say, "Oh, but there was no psionics in the Middle Ages England" with a straight face while allowing Monks in their games. Well, there was a difference between the Lindisfarne monks massacred by the Viking "Barbarians" and the "Monks" of D&D, and I think Tealgorthian is correct that flavor can be changed, trusting players not to create Pun Pun or Codzilla characters. I didn't want Halfings in my campaign originally, but I then permitted them as is due to popular demand. I made them fit without compromising the inherent integrety of my campaign, managing to maintain high levels of fun for everyone. If a player wants to play something that by all other game mechanic accounts is reasonable (ie. Soulknife as listed in the XPHB), why not at least run a solo game, or field test it? Is the DM unhappy that this player should survive combat? Does the DM want this character to die? How does the DM treat the other players' characters? How about the OP running a solo game with the DM play testing a Soulknife?
turalisj 07-06-07, 06:04 PM	Hey, would you have to take negative levels ever time you used the class ability, "Throw mind blade"? After all, you've just disarmed yourself. ROFL. Abuse the DM's nerf to the point that your character is nothing. :P
rampant 07-06-07, 06:20 PM	Have him look at this thread.
turalisj 07-06-07, 07:20 PM	What's worse is when a DM looks at Complete Psi and says it's errata.... THE ASTRAL CONSTRUCT SHOULD NOT BE LIMITED TO ONE! Um.... back to your program, already in progress... >.>
Salla 07-06-07, 07:30 PM	I dunno... he was pretty harsh, but overall I agreed with most of the post. And I'm the DM in my group. A friend of mine used to say: "There are three people in a relationship. Me, you, and us. And unless everyone's happy, it's not going to last long." While a DM shouldn't come after the players, he certainly does not come before. http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa279/LolaBonne/Awesome2.jpg
Archtyrant Terevoth 07-06-07, 08:18 PM	I think Tealgorthian has a good point. With a good group, the DM trusts players, and players aren't hellbent on disrupting the game. I think a DM that nerfs, or bans something with flawed logic, paranoia, lack of knowledge, and a round-the-table discussion on something is a DM Q. "Because I said so," should not be the end of discussion. I think in a sincerely honest and good group, a DM won't be intimidated by having a topic up for discussion. While I have no problem with discussions, they tend not to get anywhere fast unless you've got a lot of well informed players who know the rules well. A great deal of people have no idea about game balance. This post is a great example, where a DM thinks the soulknife is overpowered. This guy is clearly in a different realm of thought than most of the rest of the D&D playing world and trying to tell him that his perceived overpowered class is in fact very underpowered is going to be difficult. Now if it's so hard to show him the soulknife, imagine getting into an argument about the intricacies of polymorph. People have odd ideas about game balance sometimes, and these people exist on both sides of the DM screen. Explaining all the problems with the game to these people is going to take forever. It's a lot better if you just hand out the nerfs you're making at the start of the campaign and let the players live with it. Yeah, it might seem heavy-handed, but spending dozens of hours in rules debate isn't exactly my idea of fun. I'm sure many players may not understand every nerf I put in, and I'm willing to explain some, but what I won't do is get into some kind of democratic rules argument about whether the nerf should be implemented or not. I don't have time for votes or discussion. I'd rather spend my time playing. If people don't like my games, they're always free to find another one. While running test games is possible to balance check something, it's usually not feasible. Not everyone has time to fit in three extra D&D games just for the purpose of balance testing. If you've got that kind of time and players/DMs willing to do it, then sure, go for it, but most of us don't have those resources available and just have to try to get the game running.
Lone Wolf 10-15-07, 03:50 AM	As for DMing, yeah, this group has a problem. We've yet to find a satisfactory one. The last one threw an iron golem with a greathammer (MM4 p. 101) grafted on at a group of 3 1st level characters. That's not an encounter. That's how a cannibal mage makes chunky salsa.
CrimsonDeath 10-15-07, 01:14 PM	That's not an encounter. That's how a cannibal mage makes chunky salsa. Maybe they were supposed to run away in cowardly fear?
EvilVegan 10-15-07, 02:07 PM	While running test games is possible to balance check something, it's usually not feasible. Not everyone has time to fit in three extra D&D games just for the purpose of balance testing. If you've got that kind of time and players/DMs willing to do it, then sure, go for it, but most of us don't have those resources available and just have to try to get the game running. I use a lot of homebrew stuff and test as we go on the fly. My players are pretty mature (well, when it comes to D&D they are) and like the balancing act. It gives them another level of "play". "Lets see if we can break X and then see how to fix it." But YMMV. To the OP, your DM is well within his rights. He's making a crappy class into an equally crappy class. Play a psychic warrior. Or a duskblade. Or a fighter. Or a monk. Or a commoner.
Lycanthromancer 10-15-07, 02:20 PM	You could always play an Expert, get ranks in Use Magic Device and Use Psionic Device, and tell your DM that even with an NPC class, you're STILL more powerful than that PoS soulknife that your DM has ruined.