Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Zappy 11-15-07, 01:35 AM	I just bought the Complete Psionic book because I wanted to play one. I've been sitting here all night reading and have found that I can't. Why on earth are they selling a book that's no good. I can't play a psionic cause I don't have the Expanded Psionics Handbook which has ALL of the prereqs for just about everything in this book. In fact they don't even MAKE it any more. Can anybody tell me what I'm supposed to do with this piece of junk I just bought?
Magon 11-15-07, 01:45 AM	i suppose it's good for some heat. or you might chek out the SRD... anyway i'm pretty sure it says on the back that you have to have the XPH
Mesiolan 11-15-07, 01:59 AM	Being honest, the title of the book "complete psionics" can be deceiving. It's everything BUT complete. I can understand your anger. If you take a closer look at the PSI-boards, that the general tone for ComPsi is not anger, but disappointment. That's another story. Download the complete SRD of the psionics section. It includes almost all of the crunch you need to play. It's not even that many pages, if you print out the character creation, feat, skill and psicrystal-stuff only. Don't print out all of the powers, which take up many pages.
Tempest Stormwind 11-15-07, 02:04 AM	The XPH is still sold if you know where to look. In addition the SRD is free for all. See the FAQ at the top of the forum. (And you should ALWAYS look at the back cover text; CPsi makes it clear that you need the Expanded Psionics Handbook to use it.) Mesiolan is correct, though -- most of us are disappointed in CPsi, but for other reasons. See the FAQ for more.
Zappy 11-15-07, 02:08 AM	Any help on where to look for an XPH that was what I wanted in the first place, but since I couldn't get it I settled for this.
BlaineTog 11-15-07, 02:12 AM	You could try getting it used from Amazon.
AntiDjinn 11-15-07, 02:21 AM	The XPH is not going to be reprinted by WotC because the game is about to undergo an edition change, but there are still copies on store shelves. I just saw two copies at my local Borders, but Amazon sells it and that will be less hit or miss. You can have a copy in hand within a week if you really want it. Now the bad news: Even if you find a copy of the XPH you many not find you are getting that much use out of Complete Psionics, and you may still have buyer's remorse. The Ardent, the Lurk, a few feats, and a chunk of the powers, also the Erudite if your DM chooses to use it as a class variant, that is about it, though mileage for your game may vary.
InkBlot 11-15-07, 02:33 AM	They System Reference Document has the rules from the Expanded Psionics Handbook which you need. It's available free on the internet, in two popular formats; Sovelior & Sage (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/home.html) and Hypertext D20 (http://www.d20srd.org/). Each contains the same information, so use whichever you prefer. The SRD is lacking examples, descriptions, and anything tied to any of the official settings (e.g., the "Illithid Slayer" prestige class was renamed "Slayer" in the SRD). Other than that it's all there. Also, don't forget about the sticky threads at the top of this board. They contain a lot of links to very helpful information written by other players. There are FAQs and guides to help you, and homebrew projects as well. Don't worry about not getting your money's worth with Complete Psionics. Nobody who bought it did that. And buying the book led you here, to the wonderful Psionics board, where you can find wonders such as The Mind's Eye. (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/arch/psi) The Mind's Eye is the best psionics suppliment that WotC has produced since the Expanded Psionics Handbook, and it's a series of free online articles. Edit: The System Reference Document is also available in an unpopular format; the one that Wizard's Of The Coast originally provided it in. (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/article/srd35)
Zappy 11-15-07, 02:38 AM	Thanks for all the help guys. I think I'm going to go with the online print out option.
Zathress 11-15-07, 04:11 AM	I just bought the Complete Psionic book because I wanted to play one. I've been sitting here all night reading and have found that I can't. Why on earth are they selling a book that's no good. I can't play a psionic cause I don't have the Expanded Psionics Handbook which has ALL of the prereqs for just about everything in this book. In fact they don't even MAKE it any more. Can anybody tell me what I'm supposed to do with this piece of junk I just bought? A friend of mine made the exact same mistake, but really there is a whole series of books complete arcane, complete warrior etc. And often they have material that is useless with out another book however in there cases its the 3 core books.
Zappy 11-15-07, 02:30 PM	Ok so now that I've downloaded and printed everything out it's starting to make a lot more sense. But I still have one question. What exactly is Psionic Focus and how does it work? All I can find is references to expending it or needing to be in it.
Lycanthromancer 11-15-07, 02:37 PM	Look under the Concentration skill.
CrimsonDeath 11-15-07, 03:29 PM	Look under the Concentration skill. Here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/skills/concentration.htm), specifically.
Tempest Stormwind 11-15-07, 09:14 PM	Ok so now that I've downloaded and printed everything out it's starting to make a lot more sense. But I still have one question. What exactly is Psionic Focus and how does it work? All I can find is references to expending it or needing to be in it. In addition to the Concentration skill, there's the FAQ at the top of the forum. Also, see the New DM/Player's Guide in my sig (or in the FAQ).
Zappy 11-15-07, 10:57 PM	Thanks again everyone it's all making a lot more sense now. I'm well on my way through character creation.
imakuni67 11-16-07, 01:43 PM	A friend of mine made the exact same mistake, but really there is a whole series of books complete arcane, complete warrior etc. And often they have material that is useless with out another book however in there cases its the 3 core books. They should just make the complete complete...with all the "complete" books together. :rolleyes: ahh...sarcasm.
InkBlot 11-16-07, 03:15 PM	Hopefully in 4e they'll come up with a less confusing naming scheme.
Lycanthromancer 11-16-07, 05:03 PM	And better quality products. I swear they've made a horrible decision, what with driving customers away from them by the supremely crappy quality of their recent supplements. I can say that I, for one, am very leery about buying anything else from them ever again, if this is the kind of stuff I can expect out of them, even if it was because of the shift from 3.5 to 4.0. Just because you're switching to a new version is no reason to kick your customer base in the nadgers.
Moosh Nailo 11-18-07, 04:54 AM	Amen
draco1119 11-18-07, 08:37 AM	And better quality products. I swear they've made a horrible decision, what with driving customers away from them by the supremely crappy quality of their recent supplements. I can say that I, for one, am very leery about buying anything else from them ever again, if this is the kind of stuff I can expect out of them, even if it was because of the shift from 3.5 to 4.0. Just because you're switching to a new version is no reason to kick your customer base in the nadgers. Which is why I haven't bought anything since Complete Mage. Evrything until then was... eh. Everything after was craptacular. :)
TheKeyofE 11-18-07, 09:14 AM	Which is why I haven't bought anything since Complete Mage. Evrything until then was... eh. Everything after was craptacular. :) What about Tome of Battle? That book is made of awesome and win.
draco1119 11-18-07, 10:06 AM	What about Tome of Battle? That book is made of awesome and win. I was actually only referring to the Complete Series. I haven't even seen ToB yet, though I keep reading good things about it on the boards. :)
kelvinaw273 11-18-07, 01:39 PM	I was more impressed by Complete Psionic than with ToB, trust me on this. The latter was a: "fighters are now crap compared to casters, what can we do to make them better without giving them spells? I know! We'll take spells and call them something different! But we won't apply this to real fighters, we'll make new classes instead."
Tempest Stormwind 11-18-07, 03:19 PM	I was more impressed by Complete Psionic than with ToB, trust me on this. The latter was a: "fighters are now crap compared to casters, what can we do to make them better without giving them spells? I know! We'll take spells and call them something different! But we won't apply this to real fighters, we'll make new classes instead." 1) Maneuvers are not spells. The closest thing to them pre-TOB would be feats. The only new thing there is that these were feats designed to work once per encounter, which was a relatively novel concept (before this, we had tried the same with "all-day" (i.e. incarnum), once every five rounds (i.e. vestiges), and so on, but ToB was the first to actively say "once per encounter". The only thing maneuvers have in common with spells is that they're organized into levels. Really. 2) Fighters were already crap compared to casters from the moment the PHB hit. In fact, devs are on record as saying things like (paraphrasing: ) "I'm playing a fighter x / customprestigeclass y in a nonstandard game and I'm keeping up; the fighter doesn't need changing in the new revision". 3) Of all the core classes, the fighter is the best at using ToB maneuvers -- because all the relevant feats are Fighter bonus feats. Furthermore, with the exception of the two spellcasting PrCs (Ruby Knight Vindicator and Jade Phoenix Mage, which require caster levels) and the super-sage martial adept (Master of Nine, which is impossibly hard for a single-classed *martial adept* to enter), a straight-classed fighter can enter every prestige class in the book. And none of this touches on the fact that melee combat was flat-out boring before this (read the example in Sword and Fist, for instance: that basically amounts to people having to suck in order to be cool, and spending a long time describing a single die roll -- which is fundamentally the same as being a drama queen!)... and that a fighter played fundamentally the same as an NPC warrior, while no other PC class could claim the same. There are legitimate complaints against the Tome. None of the ones you brought up are among them.
sijigs 11-18-07, 07:38 PM	The Complete Joke strikes again!
kelvinaw273 11-19-07, 09:29 AM	1) Maneuvers are not spells. The closest thing to them pre-TOB would be feats. The only new thing there is that these were feats designed to work once per encounter, which was a relatively novel concept (before this, we had tried the same with "all-day" (i.e. incarnum), once every five rounds (i.e. vestiges), and so on, but ToB was the first to actively say "once per encounter". The only thing maneuvers have in common with spells is that they're organized into levels. Really. I believe you. Really. But at the end of the day they still end up invoking 'magical' abilities rather than sticking to the concept that the warrior does not use magic save in his equipment. The 'use per encounter' thing is actually dating back at least to 1st Ed Storyteller which is where I encountered it over fifteen years ago. 2) Fighters were already crap compared to casters from the moment the PHB hit. In fact, devs are on record as saying things like (paraphrasing: ) "I'm playing a fighter x / customprestigeclass y in a nonstandard game and I'm keeping up; the fighter doesn't need changing in the new revision". Yes <sigh> and while fighters are still needed in a party and have a role to play, that's not the same when the weedy guy who cowered behind you at level one is pushing you around at level 20. The deficiencies and inequalities should have been dealt with long before ToB. 3) Of all the core classes, the fighter is the best at using ToB maneuvers -- because all the relevant feats are Fighter bonus feats. Furthermore, with the exception of the two spellcasting PrCs (Ruby Knight Vindicator and Jade Phoenix Mage, which require caster levels) and the super-sage martial adept (Master of Nine, which is impossibly hard for a single-classed *martial adept* to enter), a straight-classed fighter can enter every prestige class in the book. And none of this touches on the fact that melee combat was flat-out boring before this (read the example in Sword and Fist, for instance: that basically amounts to people having to suck in order to be cool, and spending a long time describing a single die roll -- which is fundamentally the same as being a drama queen!)... and that a fighter played fundamentally the same as an NPC warrior, while no other PC class could claim the same. There are legitimate complaints against the Tome. None of the ones you brought up are among them. I agree the feats are good, and maybe the PrCs are handy, but the whole thrust of the book to 'redress the balance' felt to me like shutting the stable door after the horse had bolted. Mechanically, the whole stances/maneuvers system would have been better set up as feat-trees so any character could use them, not used as yet another new system. I would have to say that if you thought melee was boring, you must have a limited imagination - I never found it so, even if we couldn't use the fancy maneuvers in ToB there were plenty of options available to make combat interesting (Sword & Fist was 3.0, I'm talking 3.5 here, but I don't think they were that different), without resorting to 'drama queening'.
Tempest Stormwind 11-19-07, 12:00 PM	I believe you. Really. But at the end of the day they still end up invoking 'magical' abilities rather than sticking to the concept that the warrior does not use magic save in his equipment. The only magical use in the book that isn't part of one of the two spellcasting classes... are the supernatural abilities of the swordsage, which aren't out of line compared to what we've seen monks do from 3e onward. The warblade and crusader are completely nonmagical. The 'use per encounter' thing is actually dating back at least to 1st Ed Storyteller which is where I encountered it over fifteen years ago. I was referring to D&D, but I wasn't aware of Storyteller. Thanks. Yes <sigh> and while fighters are still needed in a party and have a role to play, that's not the same when the weedy guy who cowered behind you at level one is pushing you around at level 20. The deficiencies and inequalities should have been dealt with long before ToB. Agreed, but they didn't. With that in mind, the ToB comes close. There's still a power gap, but there isn't a "fun gap" anymore. I agree the feats are good, and maybe the PrCs are handy, but the whole thrust of the book to 'redress the balance' felt to me like shutting the stable door after the horse had bolted. Mechanically, the whole stances/maneuvers system would have been better set up as feat-trees so any character could use them, not used as yet another new system. That would have triggered FSBNNR arguments all over again and forced characters to railroad into a particular build without flexibility. The only "subsystem as feats" collection of feats I've seen any character take more than one of would be the dragonmark feats, and that's mostly due to roleplay benefits and the fact that they can be picked up as bonus feats. I would have to say that if you thought melee was boring, you must have a limited imagination - I never found it so, even if we couldn't use the fancy maneuvers in ToB there were plenty of options available to make combat interesting (Sword & Fist was 3.0, I'm talking 3.5 here, but I don't think they were that different), without resorting to 'drama queening'. Those options invariably led up to "You don't have the feat", "You get a +1, maybe, if you're lucky", or "Okay, you've specialised to the point of making this combat option interesting, but now you're up against a foe where it's worthless." I cited the 3e Sword and Fist example because it has a several-page extended example of a bar duel between experienced warriors. In order to make the duel interesting... they did deliberately subpar things (like *disarming* on one guy's part, while the other uses a broken bottle instead of going for their +3 sword) and elaborately described, at length, things like "He missed my AC" with flowery language of dynamic parries. I could do *exactly* the same thing with an NPC class. If I were interested in relying on roleplay to make my combat interesting, I wouldn't care whether I was playing an NPC or a PC class, but given how people play PC classes, they *should* be a cut above them, no? Such as having active parries (Wall of Blades), enough battle knowledge to make a broken whiskey bottle an effective weapon (pretty much any +damage strike), and so on.
CrimsonDeath 11-19-07, 01:22 PM	The only magical use in the book that isn't part of one of the two spellcasting classes... are the supernatural abilities of the swordsage, which aren't out of line compared to what we've seen monks do from 3e onward. The warblade and crusader are completely nonmagical. So, it's perfectly nonmagical if you hit me on the back of the head and that bruise across your buddy's face suddenly disappears because of it? Now, the Warblade, I'll buy that he's totally nonmagical.
kelvinaw273 11-19-07, 01:24 PM	Well I think we've gone off-topic <shrugs> I never had the 'you don't have the feat' problem, but then maybe I focus more on what I can do not on what I can't, or maybe we just get to fight in interesting areas where we can use terrain and other things to our advantage. That said, I have known some players who are constantly trying to do 'clever' stunts and holding up play while they agonize over trying to bull rush the large-sized creature in front of them with a low Strength halfling and no Improved Bull Rush feat, and spending ten minutes trying to wrangle an advantage in that situation out of your DM can make combat boring for everyone. Yes, some things you cannot pull without the feats or skills, other things you can do. I guess it's horses for courses - I find CPsi has some options I like and can use, and ToB has far less. Others will find otherwise. Meh, as long as we're having fun, who cares?
Lionhearted 11-19-07, 01:39 PM	http://www.d20srd.org/
InkBlot 11-19-07, 01:51 PM	So, it's perfectly nonmagical if you hit me on the back of the head and that bruise across your buddy's face suddenly disappears because of it? It's perfectly nonmagical if I hit you in the back of the head and that makes my buddy want to keep on fighting despite the bruise across his face. Hit points represent a lot more than mere physical damage. Although making Devoted Spirit healing maneuvers/stances supernatural was a frequently mentioned houserule when ToB came out, I prefer to leave them mundane. In addition to the fact that hit points have never represented pure physical damage, I prefer the roleplaying options which a mundane Devoted Spirit has. I'd rather keep the option of flavoring it as a warrior's deeds inspiring his comrades to push on in the face of death, than force every Crusader to be just another lap dog of the Gods in an attempt to squeeze an extra iota of verisimilitude out of this silly game.
aotrscommander 11-20-07, 09:31 AM	It's perfectly nonmagical if I hit you in the back of the head and that makes my buddy want to keep on fighting despite the bruise across his face. Hit points represent a lot more than mere physical damage. Although making Devoted Spirit healing maneuvers/stances supernatural was a frequently mentioned houserule when ToB came out, I prefer to leave them mundane. In addition to the fact that hit points have never represented pure physical damage, I prefer the roleplaying options which a mundane Devoted Spirit has. I'd rather keep the option of flavoring it as a warrior's deeds inspiring his comrades to push on in the face of death, than force every Crusader to be just another lap dog of the Gods in an attempt to squeeze an extra iota of verisimilitude out of this silly game. With the danger of dragging this thread furter off topic, to expand on this I'm going to attempt, next time I get to create a character, to turn a cleric with but a single level of Monk into a Naruto-shinobi - and flavour my Cure spells as him yelling crap about not giving up and all that bollocks. (Yes, I'm probably mad, but I blame you lot - especially Tempest and Disposable Hero - for being a bad influence with your reflavouring psionics and flavour is mutable malarky Now see what you've done... Seriously, though, what's a better catchphrase for a cleric than "Believe it!", right? NarutoDZilla for the win! ... Okay, I'll be quiet now.)
Slagger the Chuul 11-21-07, 01:05 AM	With the danger of dragging this thread furter off topic, to expand on this I'm going to attempt, next time I get to create a character, to turn a cleric with but a single level of Monk into a Naruto-shinobi - and flavour my Cure spells as him yelling crap about not giving up and all that bollocks. At least you'll have a nice AC bonus from Wisdom. Just don't forget your holy symbol headband. :)
Pandapeep 11-21-07, 01:20 AM	I have never understood the hate for Complete Champion on Scoundrel. The affiliation scores for classes are neat, and can be pretty useful, Ordained Champion is a fun prestige class, there a some neat feats in it, the fist of the forest looks pretty cool. As for Scoundrel, well, hell, skill tricks are worth the price of the book alone, even before some good feats, including luck feats.
InkBlot 11-21-07, 01:38 AM	People hate Complete Scoundrel? That book is great! The skill tricks are revolutionary. The big opening on what it means to be a scoundrel, and all the little sidebar fluff pieces, were a blast to read. I love being able to point at the book whenever somebody starts to get into a debate over Jack Sparrow's alignment (I know it'll always be open to interpretation, but it's fun anyway). There were prestige classes for concepts I'd love to play; the malconvoker, the cloaked dancer, and everything involving skill tricks. That said, the psibond agent is made of fail and the Luck feats don't seem worth it at all. Yes, I've seen them in actual play. A flat bonus that lasts all day is just better than limited daily rerolls.
aotrscommander 11-21-07, 11:20 AM	At least you'll have a nice AC bonus from Wisdom. That's what the Monk level is for (and the unarmed strikes, for course!) Just don't forget your holy symbol headband. :) Eeriely, that was exactly what I was intending doing for my holy symbol. (Because he doesn't need to actually 'hold' his holy symbol; so long as his hand is mechanically occupied 'brandishing' it and not doing anything he wouldn't be able to do with a holysymbol in his hand, I can just describe the flavour of it as him doing some extra hand seals. And if the DM lets me not even worry about that, then that's okay too!) I liked Scoundral, actually. Champion I found even less use than Complete Psi since it had so much world-specific flavour that no matter what the designer may have said, doesn't fit in with a campaign setting that does not attempt to ape Greyhawk in any way (so I don't have anologues of greyhawk deities). I also thought most of the PrCs were crap, but that's nothing new. I think the only splatbooks which got more-or-less the entirity of the PrC included in my Use list was UT because they were of a suitably world-generic flavour.