Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Psychic_Robot 03-19-08, 04:38 AM	What the hell. It is absolutely ridiculous that CPsi STILL doesn't have errata but CMage and CScoundrel do. (Of course, the CMage errata nerfs the hell out of a number of builds, sadly enough.) GOOD GRIEF. WHAT DO WE HAVE TO DO TO GET ERRATA? JUST SAY THAT THE DIVINE MIND IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE FULL BAB AND BONUS FEATS AND WE'LL BE OFF TO A GOOD START. And why is the lurk's "additional sneak attack" ability so gimped? BLARGH. AND DON'T GET ME STARTED ON THE SAVING THROWS GLORMPH.
runestar 03-19-08, 07:28 AM	I will take ToB errata over CPsi errata any day.:P
CrimsonDeath 03-19-08, 12:19 PM	WHAT DO WE HAVE TO DO TO GET ERRATA? Wait. It's in the works. JUST SAY THAT THE DIVINE MIND IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE FULL BAB AND BONUS FEATS AND WE'LL BE OFF TO A GOOD START. Sadly, I dont' think that's what errata is for...
Psychic_Robot 03-19-08, 12:31 PM	HURGLEBLIRGENSPAT. CPsi errata is a lie.
Tempest Stormwind 03-19-08, 01:41 PM	HURGLEBLIRGENSPAT. CPsi errata is a lie. The errata is a lie. The errata is a lie. The errata is a lie. The errata is a lie. ....Sorry. Seriously. It's in the works. Yes, it's taking a while, but it's Complete Psionic. They'd practically need to rewrite the whole freakin' book anyway. I'd be more concerned if the errata was already out.
CrimsonDeath 03-19-08, 02:07 PM	HURGLEBLIRGENSPAT. CPsi errata is a lie. Are you calling me a liar? Because that's what it seems like you're doing.
Lycanthromancer 03-19-08, 02:11 PM	CPsi IS errata. It's just very bad errata. ...that needs to be errata'd.
Roland_of_the_Eld 03-19-08, 05:48 PM	Everyone knows that it's errata all the way down!
Lycanthromancer 03-19-08, 05:51 PM	That's tortoises.
Roland_of_the_Eld 03-19-08, 05:55 PM	I've always heard it as turtles, but at least someone got my reference.
Lycanthromancer 03-19-08, 05:58 PM	It's turtles only if you prefer to make soup, rather than shishkabobs. And no, that doesn't make any sense. And I like it that way.
HermitIX 03-19-08, 06:12 PM	[QUOTE=Tempest Stormwind;15379223]The errata is a lie. The errata is a lie. The errata is a lie. The errata is a lie. QUOTE] Perhaps you would feel better with this Weighted Companion Errata.
Roland_of_the_Eld 03-19-08, 06:22 PM	But you already know how well that ends.
TheKeyofE 03-19-08, 06:33 PM	The errata is a lie. The errata is a lie. The errata is a lie. The errata is a lie. http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m72/thekeyofe/motivator8402511.jpg I've always heard it as turtles, but at least someone got my reference. I like turtles. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMNry4PE93Y)
Metafictional 03-19-08, 08:22 PM	I'm confused, why would the Divine Mind need a higher BAB and bonus Feats? They get the ability to manifest powers (from 1st-level if you use the Hidden Talent variant), multiple granted powers from their Mantles, and multiple auras (while I grant some of the auras are kind of lame, there are quite a few, like the telepathy one, that are very nice). Oh and Divine Grace too. So doesn't that make them already equal to the Dragon Shaman?
Psychic_Robot 03-19-08, 08:58 PM	No. The divine mind sucks.
Otakkun 03-19-08, 10:24 PM	No. The divine mind sucks. REALLY bad you should add.
Lycanthromancer 03-19-08, 10:27 PM	It's like a paladin. ...If you gave it medium BAB, took away its smiting, animal companion, and Cha-based abilites. And paladins aren't that great anyway.
Roland_of_the_Eld 03-20-08, 12:26 PM	Honestly, I think that they should just say the it has full BAB, or acknowledge that they screwed up, and give us a refund. But the ardent is shiny, which almost makes up for it.
awaken_D_M_golem 03-20-08, 07:19 PM	I'm confused, why would the Divine Mind need ... If you start with a Cleric, and eliminate 1/2 of the spell levels it can cast per day, and eliminate 1/2 of the spells it can cast per day, and made 3/4ths of the spell levels left be stuck in 1, 1st level spell only, and delayed it's Turning 3(+) levels with an extra mechanic, and eliminate 9th level spells, and eliminate 8th level spells, and eliminate 7th level spells, and eliminate 6th level spells, (unless you really know the Ardent Mind's Eye entry) and there is more but hey look, 21 hit points and ... the AURA. That fixes everything. ;) Isn't 4th Edition, the errata ?!
Metafictional 03-21-08, 01:39 AM	I don't see why you'd compare the Divine Mind to a Cleric. It's more like, take a Paladin, drop the BA to 3/4, give them a good Will save, two additional auras over the Paladin's (which is about as useful as a Remove Fear spell; while not all the Div Mind auras are cool, there are a few really nice one, like Communication), and with potentially better range, add higher level powers (the Paladin gets 4th level spells, the Divine Mind gets better than this), and lose what...Lay on Hands, Turn Undead and the warhorse? Turn Undead is only good for Divine Feats, a detailed glance at the MM 1 reveals that the vast majority of undead are immune to being turned by a Cleric of equal level to the undead's CR due to high HD on undead and turn resistance. And as for the value of Divine Feats, it should be pointed out that the Div Mind gets access to psionic feats due to their ability to maintain a psionic focus. The warhorse is infamously situational in it's use as well, but I'm not arguing that these are bad abilities, just pointing out they are hardly necessary. Detect Evil, Divine Health, Remove Disease, Smite Evil, and LoH are the big losses, but let's compare: So -5 BAB at 20th, -Lay on Hands, -Turn Undead, Warhorse, Smite, Detect Evil, Divine Health, Remove Disease for: higher level powers, 3 granted powers from Mantles, 2 auras for 3 that can be used at once, with up to 50' range, +6 will save, ability to maintain a psionic focus for psi feats... Basically, if you accept that the Paladin is fine, then the Divine Mind is also fine. If you feel the Paladin is lacking, then buff the Paladin and the Divine Mind. I personally like the Divine Mind better than the Paladin, especially since it doesn't come bogged down with lame restrictions on how to roleplay the class.
Nephlite 03-21-08, 09:22 AM	Basically, if you accept that the Paladin is fine, then the Divine Mind is also fine. If you feel the Paladin is lacking, then buff the Paladin and the Divine Mind. I personally like the Divine Mind better than the Paladin, especially since it doesn't come bogged down with lame restrictions on how to roleplay the class. That is problem: the paladin is balanced if we remove its code. That is the only reason the Paladin sucks. So Divine Mind isn't fine because the Paladin isn't fine.
MnemonicSV 03-21-08, 01:27 PM	I think it's a safe bet that the reason why CPsi errata is so delayed, is simply because the designers are busy with other projects (you know, little things like oh, say, 4e). They likely don't have much time to create the errata, or at least look over it closely (if it's created by someone else, such as custserv). I mean honestly, Bruce R. Cordell (one of the CPsi designers) likely has quite a bit on his plate at the moment and strict deadlines that need to be met. CPsi errata just isn't high up on the list. Nobody can blame him for putting the errata on the back-burner. And as for Chris Lindsay (the other designer of CPsi)... well... I honestly don't know. As far a the WOTC website goes, his last article was over a year ago. I don't believe he has a 4e Blog either (even though that's not an indication of activity). I think his greatest credit up until being a full-on "designer" (for CPsi) was "additional design" (for PHBII, which has a miniscule amount of psionic content). Long story short, he's not an active psionic designer... I doubt he will be overseeing any CPsi errata. Which may be a good thing. It has been opined before in this forum (not by me) that BRC likely had little to do with CPsi's actual design, and that it was mostly Lindsay's work (mostly assembling psionic content from other sources, and throwing in fluff text). My personal theory is that BRC probably laid down the basic groundwork of the supplement (likely base classes, a bunch of good feats, and the like), and Lindsay filled in the gaps... sort of. We will likely never know the full truth of the matter. What is evident however, is that Lindsay had little (if any) psionic content experience (going by what information I can find about him on the WOTC site) which may be a good reason why CPsi was such an awful supplement. Let's all hope he doesn't contribute to the errata... because then the errata might need errata. Just my :twocents:
DracoPhoenix 03-23-08, 09:10 PM	(I'm in the Comp Psi = 40% rubbish (half of it could be condensed into one instance with multiple applications.) camp btw) On the plus side, as Comp Psi is errata in a book, your DM is quite free to ban the book and thus the errata no longer applies. You can't really ban officially "errata" errata. (Or, at their discretion, only ban certain parts of it. Like say, XPH powers trump Comp Psi's.)
CrimsonDeath 03-24-08, 03:01 AM	Theoretically, the DM can ban whatever he likes. He could ban Core and use house rules to cover the holes that splat-books don't. Alternatively, he could just use the parts of CPsi that he likes and ban what he doesn't.
DracoPhoenix 03-24-08, 03:59 PM	Theoretically, the DM can ban whatever he likes. He could ban Core and use house rules to cover the holes that splat-books don't. Alternatively, he could just use the parts of CPsi that he likes and ban what he doesn't. True, but the whole WotC have fessed up and amended / clarified the rules for X kinda back fires when the PCs say "so if we don't but this book, Astral construct gets the same limit as as summon X spells?" as opposed to available to anyone for the cost of an other wise free download. (ie printing * net access costs). Speaking of which Did WotC ever errata or "errata" via Comp Mage the Summon spells to be 1 per caster at a time? Or in light of popular opinion, retract the "errata" or promise to retract it in the next psi book? Just asking... >.>
Renown0 03-24-08, 08:03 PM	I went through about the first ten posts before I had to post this. This THREAD is the thing that's ridiculous. So are any posts that say that psionics is overpowered. This is due to the fact that psionics ARE overpowered, compared to other combat systems, anyway. Anyone who wants to make them less powerful is out of their mind, no pun intended. Psionics is the ability to alter reality with your mind. According to religion in general, that classifies you as a god. If a person begins learning to control reality with his mind, they're learning, in short, to become a god. Nerd-Tidbit #1. Jean Grey from the X-Men was pretty much the most powerful one ever, because anything that came at her would die if she wanted them to. They had no way to stop it because the speed of thought is infinitely fast. Just look at your hands, and move your fingers... That's right, unless you have a mental disability, they move the moment you want them to. They change direction to hit the next letter on your keyboard almost subconsciously, they reach up to scratch your nose and go back down with almost no thought, and they move the mouse to the spot you want to click with no problem whatsoever. Plus, your brain regulates functions throughout your body without you even having to bother telling them to. Nerd-Tidbit #2. Why do you think all the legendary Pokemon are psychic-typed? Now, scientists say that the average human is only able to use 10% of their brain power, and we can do all this? Wow, 10% is pretty good, I'd say. An epic level psionic character goes up to about 50%, thus making him, basically, a demi-god. What if we could control all 100%? Our abilities as humans would become nearly infinite. A.K.A. Pun-Pun material, even without the magic. Nerd-Tidbit #3. A Club of IQ Dropping +1 works very nicely when fighting psionic creatures. So, all in all, what I have to say is, "IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, SHOVE IT IN ANY PART OF YOUR ANATOMY YOU WISH!" Just get your DM to say, "Hey, guys, no more psionics." Or, if you're like me, in the DM's seat, just say it yourself! Just don't bother WotC with the whining meant for your DM! They have our best interests in mind, and DON'T MAKE US BUY ALL THE FREAKING ACCESSORY BOOKS IF WE DON'T WANT TO! EDIT: All of the above, other than the first sentence, is now in my signature, in case you wanted to read it again. EDIT2: Never mind...
Lycanthromancer 03-24-08, 08:43 PM	Stuff.What? Not only is that pretty far off topic, it doesn't even make sense in the context of what we're talking about. The OP wants to get errata for one of the worst books WotC has ever published (and is known such primarily for having so many mistakes that more of the book is unusable than is actually usable). What's wrong with wanting usable material for one's favorite game mechanic? And what's wrong with getting value for your money, as opposed to throwing it away on something that you can't even use?
CrimsonDeath 03-24-08, 10:08 PM	Psionics is the ability to alter reality with your mind. According to religion in general, that classifies you as a god. I don't intend to get into a religious debate here, but I'm not familiar with that particular definition of a god. Nerd-Tidbit #1. Jean Grey from the X-Men was pretty much the most powerful one ever, because anything that came at her would die if she wanted them to. They had no way to stop it because the speed of thought is infinitely fast. Then why is she dead? (Also, the speed of a neural impulse through the brain is pretty slow compared to light, or even electricity. The only thing I can think of that might be infinitely fast is quantum entanglement.) Nerd-Tidbit #2. Why do you think all the legendary Pokemon are psychic-typed? You mean like Moltres, Zapdos, and Articuno? Or Raikou, Entei, and Suicune? Now, scientists say that the average human is only able to use 10% of their brain power, and we can do all this? Wow, 10% is pretty good, I'd say. At one time. Throughout your life, every single part of your brain gets used, just not all at once. Unless you think you can drive a spike through your head and be just fine? After all, there's only a 10% chance you'd hit something important. What if we could control all 100%? A grand mal seizure. Nerd-Tidbit #3. A Club of IQ Dropping +1 works very nicely when fighting psionic creatures. I'm sure it would, if it existed. Well, it would work pretty well against psions, creatures that manifest and psions, and psionic creatures with animal-like Intelligence. Pretty much anyone else would be more or less fine, at least for a few attacks. Oh, and you know who else it would work fairly well against? Wizards. So, all in all, what I have to say is, "IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, SHOVE IT IN ANY PART OF YOUR ANATOMY YOU WISH!" Just get your DM to say, "Hey, guys, no more psionics." Or, if you're like me, in the DM's seat, just say it yourself! Just don't bother WotC with the whining meant for your DM! They have our best interests in mind, and DON'T MAKE US BUY ALL THE FREAKING ACCESSORY BOOKS IF WE DON'T WANT TO! You know, I don't think you read the first ten posts of this thread after all. I don't think you read any of them, because you obviously have absolutely no idea what the thread is about.
Renown0 03-24-08, 11:24 PM	I don't intend to get into a religious debate here, but I'm not familiar with that particular definition of a god. I didn't mean to either. But, you see, people who believe in a god believe that their god can control things with... thoughts, basically. Then why is she dead? (Also, the speed of a neural impulse through the brain is pretty slow compared to light, or even electricity. The only thing I can think of that might be infinitely fast is quantum entanglement.) Because Stan Lee always thinks up even crazier ways for her to die, and she always comes back as the Phoenix. (And when I say infinitely fast, I mean that we ARE small enough that it takes practically no time at all for said impulses to reach their intended destination within the body. You mean like Moltres, Zapdos, and Articuno? Or Raikou, Entei, and Suicune? I mean all the good ones. Mewtwo, Lugia, Latios/Latias, Celebi, Jirachi, Deoxis, etc. You know, the ones that the movies always portray as the "Masters of the Universe". At one time. Throughout your life, every single part of your brain gets used, just not all at once. Unless you think you can drive a spike through your head and be just fine? After all, there's only a 10% chance you'd hit something important. I was talking about brain POWER, not function. The 10% we can use is what our brain lets us. We have limits on, for example, how much our brain lets our muscles work. If we were able to take away those limits, which takes a larger amount of brain power than we have, we could basically do anything. A grand mal seizure. Half-cookie material for lightening the mood a bit. I'm sure it would, if it existed. Well, it would work pretty well against psions, creatures that manifest and psions, and psionic creatures with animal-like Intelligence. Pretty much anyone else would be more or less fine, at least for a few attacks. Oh, and you know who else it would work fairly well against? Wizards. Also, creatures who are immune to critical hits may not take damage from the Club of IQ Dropping . The DM may also choose whether or not it can affect non-intelligent psionic creatures. Hmmm. I should actually make that. :D Quote: Originally Posted by Renown0 View Post Stuff. What? Not only is that pretty far off topic, it doesn't even make sense in the context of what we're talking about. The OP wants to get errata for one of the worst books WotC has ever published (and is known such primarily for having so many mistakes that more of the book is unusable than is actually usable). What's wrong with wanting usable material for one's favorite game mechanic? And what's wrong with getting value for your money, as opposed to throwing it away on something that you can't even use? Please see my explanation for the quote just below, here. You know, I don't think you read the first ten posts of this thread after all. I don't think you read any of them, because you obviously have absolutely no idea what the thread is about. Ah, but I did. And I do. My whole point with all that above was that psionics is basically MEANT TO BE OVERPOWERED. People who get angry due to the fact that it is overpowered, broken, or un-errata-ed should not whine about it to WotC when they made D&D into such an easily edited game. Just make your own errata for it, or something.
MnemonicSV 03-25-08, 12:09 AM	I didn't mean to either. But, you see, people who believe in a god believe that their god can control things with... thoughts, basically. Well... theologists may contend that divine will is actually a far cry from thoughts in many regards. Whose to say that divine intervention isn't something that exists beyond thoughts? Thoughts have limits. Gods may not be quite so limited in regard to their capacities. But, I digress... Ah, but I did. And I do. My whole point with all that above was that psionics is basically MEANT TO BE OVERPOWERED. People who get angry due to the fact that it is overpowered, broken, or un-errata-ed should not whine about it to WotC when they made D&D into such an easily edited game. Just make your own errata for it, or something. Well, here's the thing: You are the only one in this thread who is getting angy or whining about psionics being, supposedly, "overpowered." Everyone else in this thread is disappointed by Complete Psionics (and it's lack of errata) because it only served to generally "nerf" psionics (as compared to magic) in many ways, not overpower it. Your statement that psionics is "meant to be overpowered" is a pure judgement call based on your own experiences with psionics (if any), and has little or nothing to actually back it up. Especially because, well, only the designers could possibly know what they "meant" psionics to be (no designer intends for anything to be overpowered). BTW, that you posted that statement in all-caps only serves to imply that you are, in fact, trolling. I mean, if I were to post a thread in the Spells and Magic forum that contained "ALL MAGIC IS MEANT TO BE BROKEN," I'd get a troll stamp faster than a zerth cenobite manifesting Time mantle powers. If you really want to create a "Psionics is Overpowered" post, do so in a separate thread, so we can point at, laugh at, shoot down, then stamp that thread as trollish separately. But it really has no place in this thread. At all.
Tempest Stormwind 03-25-08, 02:24 AM	Setting aside the blatant errors about psionics in your post (as Mnemonic pretty much speaks for me on this point), I'd like to lay your whole "10% of the brain" thing to bed, right now -- because as a scientist involved in studying the mind and the brain, that you prescribe to that urban myth tells me nothing except that you believe what sounds good. The human brain is continually active. If only 10% were active at any given point, your body would shut down. The cerebellum alone comprises well over 10% of the brain's volume, but additionally holds a significantly higher fraction of the brain's neurons (I'd have to look up the exact proportion, but it's close to 50%, in just that one little lump)-- and it's what controls much of your autonomous functions, such as balance, breathing, heartbeats, and digestion. If only 10% were active, you wouldn't be able to do those things while moving and thinking. You could, in all honesty, have limited yourself to the cortex -- after all, that's what most people think of when they refer to "the brain" (even though the brain contains numerous other structures (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snO68aJTOpM); the cortex is just the outermost bit, the "wrinkly thing" that most people think of when they hear "brain"). Furthermore, the cortex is what's associated with thinking -- "lower" animals don't have as much of it, especially where the frontal lobe is concerned. However, the problem with this is that the cortex itself is also constantly active -- it's what processes the various stimuli taken in from the rest of the body (constantly, even those you aren't aware of!), amongst other things. If only 10% of that were active, you'd have a hard time handling more than one task at a time. This is, of course, grossly simplified -- I'm assuming NO background information on the brain here (which is why I linked what I linked above, instead of a more technical discussion -- it's accurate, by the way). However, it's not so simplfied to believe such a thing as "you only use 10% of your brain". On an unrelated note, CrimsonDeath: You might want to look at any introductory psychology textbook before claiming people can't survive with a spike in their heads; one of the examples that is *always* present in such books is Phineas Gage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phineas_Gage). I'll let Wikipedia speak for itself on that subject. (No offense intended; people who aren't into neuroscience or psychology likely haven't heard of him.)
ppaladin123 03-25-08, 02:50 AM	Setting aside the blatant errors about psionics in your post (as Mnemonic pretty much speaks for me on this point), I'd like to lay your whole "10% of the brain" thing to bed, right now -- because as a scientist involved in studying the mind and the brain, that you prescribe to that urban myth tells me nothing except that you believe what sounds good. The human brain is continually active. If only 10% were active at any given point, your body would shut down. The cerebellum alone comprises well over 10% of the brain's volume, but additionally holds a significantly higher fraction of the brain's neurons (I'd have to look up the exact proportion, but it's close to 50%, in just that one little lump)-- and it's what controls much of your autonomous functions, such as balance, breathing, heartbeats, and digestion. If only 10% were active, you wouldn't be able to do those things while moving and thinking. You could, in all honesty, have limited yourself to the cortex -- after all, that's what most people think of when they refer to "the brain" (even though the brain contains numerous other structures (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snO68aJTOpM); the cortex is just the outermost bit, the "wrinkly thing" that most people think of when they hear "brain"). Furthermore, the cortex is what's associated with thinking -- "lower" animals don't have as much of it, especially where the frontal lobe is concerned. However, the problem with this is that the cortex itself is also constantly active -- it's what processes the various stimuli taken in from the rest of the body (constantly, even those you aren't aware of!), amongst other things. If only 10% of that were active, you'd have a hard time handling more than one task at a time. This is, of course, grossly simplified -- I'm assuming NO background information on the brain here (which is why I linked what I linked above, instead of a more technical discussion -- it's accurate, by the way). However, it's not so simplfied to believe such a thing as "you only use 10% of your brain". On an unrelated note, CrimsonDeath: You might want to look at any introductory psychology textbook before claiming people can't survive with a spike in their heads; one of the examples that is *always* present in such books is Phineas Gage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phineas_Gage). I'll let Wikipedia speak for itself on that subject. (No offense intended; people who aren't into neuroscience or psychology likely haven't heard of him.) Didn't Phineas Gage lose the ability to make decisions because of damage to the emotional centers of his brain? Good post on the 10 percent brain thing...that is one of the more annoying memes out there.
CrimsonDeath 03-25-08, 12:30 PM	On an unrelated note, CrimsonDeath: You might want to look at any introductory psychology textbook before claiming people can't survive with a spike in their heads; one of the examples that is *always* present in such books is Phineas Gage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phineas_Gage). I'll let Wikipedia speak for itself on that subject. (No offense intended; people who aren't into neuroscience or psychology likely haven't heard of him.) Oh, yeah, I know he survived for several years. However, his personality was drastically altered, so it would be erroneous to claim that he wasn't using the part of his brain that was destroyed by the spike. (And I was actually waiting for Renown0 to call me on that...) Furthermore, thousands of people have survived lobotomies, although with alterned personalities and, in some cases, diminished capacity.
The_Mess 03-25-08, 01:07 PM	To cover something tempest let be glossed over, the reference to grand mal seizure in his previous post was not a joke. When all of your brain activates at once, a grand mal is what happens. It is a very bad thing. We use far more than 10% of our brains. Probably not quite all of it (evolution is wasteful), and some of it is tadpole parts that cause us to have hiccups (http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2008/02/your-inner-fish-1.html), but anyone trying to "increase the percentage of the brain use" is a quack.
Tempest Stormwind 03-25-08, 04:07 PM	CrimsonDeath: Ah, got it. I suspected you may have been leading him (spike through the brain is kind of explicit; if you hadn't meant Gage you would probably have used generic "damage" or surgery as the example), but I couldn't be sure. The_Mess: A more dramatic example is the visual system in the midbrain. (I'd have to look up the exact name of the structure involved again; memorization of names that anyone can look up in five minutes is one of the reasons I despise how biology is taught...) Basically, people who are blind (due to damage to the visual cortex of the brain, so in other words their brains cannot process visual cues in the same way we do) can still respond to objects thrown at them (they can catch them!) or navigate around cluttered rooms, all the while insisting that they can't see a thing. Basically, the structure that allows them to "see" is the same one that lets frogs track their prey and lash out at the fly with surprising accuracy. The technical name for this phenominon is literally "blindsight". One book I would highly recommend for anyone interested in this subject -- because it's easily readable and goes into a good amount of technical detail -- is The Accidental Mind by David Linden. It's an excellent layman introduction to neurobiology and biopsychology.
CrimsonDeath 03-25-08, 04:31 PM	CrimsonDeath: Ah, got it. I suspected you may have been leading him (spike through the brain is kind of explicit; if you hadn't meant Gage you would probably have used generic "damage" or surgery as the example), but I couldn't be sure. I actually stole the idea of asking if he's willing to damage his own brain to prove a point from someone else (I forget whom). That person used a pencil though; I did change it to a spike for that exact reason. And as you deduced, I did first hear of Mr. Gage in a psychology class.
Legdiwena 03-25-08, 05:15 PM	i can't believe pokemon were mentioned as defense in a DnD argument. I need to go soak my brain in acid now.
Relanir 03-27-08, 11:50 AM	I mean all the good ones. Mewtwo, Lugia, Latios/Latias, Celebi, Jirachi, Deoxis, etc. You know, the ones that the movies always portray as the "Masters of the Universe". What about Kyogre (Water), Groudon (Ground), Rayquaza (Dragon/Flying), Dialga (Dragon/Steel), Palkia (Dragon/Water), Giratina (Dragon/Ghost), and Arceus (Normal)? Those ones are literally the "Masters of the Universe" in Pokemon. Kyogre, Groudon, and Rayquaza are supposed to have created the oceans, continents, and sky (respectively); Dialga, Palkia, and Giratina are the physical incarnations of time, space, and death (respectively); Arceus is more or less supposed to be God or something (created existence.) None of them are psychic type, though Arceus can be if you give it the right plate, just like it can be any of the other types. Yes, I know I am a huge nerd by knowing all of this. i can't believe pokemon were mentioned as defense in a DnD argument. I need to go soak my brain in acid now. Might want to keep that acid out a bit longer...
Michaelk 03-31-08, 02:57 PM	One book I would highly recommend for anyone interested in this subject -- because it's easily readable and goes into a good amount of technical detail -- is The Accidental Mind by David Linden. It's an excellent layman introduction to neurobiology and biopsychology. Another good one is "The man who mistook his wife for a hat" by Oliver Sacks.