Transparency-How often skills psicraft/spellcraft combined [Archive] - Wizards Community

Transparency-How often skills psicraft/spellcraft combined [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Roflin
07-24-07, 05:35 PM I'm using Psionics/Magic transparency in my campaign. I've read all the old posts and it was mentioned that many DM's choose to collapse spellcraft and psicraft into a single skill, as well as collapsing use magic device and use psionic device into a single skill. I need to decide whether or not to do this in my campaign. My initial intention was to make them the same skill, but I read somwhere (SRD?) that skills and feats are not transparent unless they say they are. I am now leaning towards keeping them separate. Is there a consensus out there as to what the majority of DM's are doing on this?
InkBlot
07-24-07, 06:07 PM Skills and feats are not transparent. Spells and powers are transparent. That's how the rules work.

Now, whether or not those rules are a good idea is up to every individual player and DM. Ditto, whether or not to use the rules as the are written is up to every individual gamming group.

I've both used RAW and eschewed RAW (making the skills transparent). Both turned out fine.

In one game, the players were foreigners colonizing a new land across the sea, and I wanted to emphasize the difference between the artificial arcane magic of the old world and the natural psychic abilities of the natives. So I made the skills non-transparent. It didn't make much difference, especialy since there was a psion in the party.

In another game, I wanted it to be a simple hack/slash affair, and I wanted to allow the flavor of divine/arcane/psionic to bleed across the mechanical distinctions. So I made the skills transparent. It didn't make much difference either, since it's just a hack/slash game.

The players were suprised when the evil kobold "sorcerer" manifested swarm of crystals on them, but that was because I exploited the player's metagame knowledge. It was not because the skills were transparent. Having the skills be transparent has allowed me to include both dorjes and wands in treasure, without worrying about whether or not the party factotum has ranks in Use Psionic Device or Use Magic Device.
ChimericalWolf
07-24-07, 06:58 PM One of the main arguments I have for combining Spellcraft/Psicraft and UMD/UPD is the lack of distinction between Arcanecraft and Divinecraft, and Use Arcane Device and Use Divine Device.
Ralp
07-24-07, 08:09 PM DM's choose to collapse spellcraft and psicraft into a single skill, as well as collapsing use magic device and use psionic device into a single skill. I need to decide whether or not to do this in my campaign. My initial intention was to make them the same skill, but I read somwhere (SRD?) that skills and feats are not transparent unless they say they are. I am now leaning towards keeping them separate.

If you want to hedge your bets, maybe allow characters to use one for the other at, say, a -4 penalty. It's worked out alright in my campaign so far.
Knowledge (Psionics) and (Arcana) are kept fully separate.
CrimsonDeath
07-24-07, 08:13 PM Originally, the main reason I would've rolled Use Psionic Device and Use Magic Device together was because of how many magic items there are and how few psionic items there were. Now, with the Magic Item Compendium, it's clear that most "magic" items can be crafted by a psionicist. It makes little sense for there to exist two mechanically identical items, of which a character with Use Magic Device can activate one but not the other.
Zarreth_Nessad
07-24-07, 08:26 PM In the games I run, which is usually in my own form of FR, Spellcraft, Psicraft, Kn. (Arcana), & Kn. (Psionics) are all separate skills, but I combine UMD & UPD since they aren't necessarily reliant on what made them, but rather on how they work.

As to the separation of Divine/Arcane/Psionic, in FR Magic & Psionics are transparent, just like Divine & Arcane (aka they're lumped into the same category of "Magic", not separated to determine transparency with Psionics). Divine magic and Arcane magic are generally based on the same schools, rules, etc, but Psionic "magic" is based on somewhat different "schools", having different distinctions. Therefore, the learning of the types of magic (Arcane, Divine & Psionic) is separate (the knowledge skills), the practice between Psionic and the other two is different (Psicraft vs Spellcraft), and the use of the devices, having generally the same kind of triggers, is the same (combine UMD & UPD). This is just my reasoning of why I do things the way I do (I like having explanations for everything). Also, I agree with CrimsonDeath's prior statement, about it not making sense with the Magic Item Compendium combining Magical creation & Psionic creation.
sijigs
07-25-07, 02:02 AM If you want to hedge your bets, maybe allow characters to use one for the other at, say, a -4 penalty. It's worked out alright in my campaign so far.
Knowledge (Psionics) and (Arcana) are kept fully separate.

I proposed complete transparency with Psi/Spellcraft and UPD/UMD to my fellow players and got a steep beating the other week. :(

My argument was how Divine/Arcane worked together blah blah

I completely agree with the above statement.

Perhaps new material or 4.0 will cover this.
Lycanthromancer
07-25-07, 02:06 AM This is Wizards of the Coast we're talking about. Not Psions of the Coast.

I don't think that's gonna happen any time soon, as is evidenced by Complete Psionic. *Psigh*
InkBlot
07-25-07, 02:35 AM I've toyed around with the idea of ditching psicraft and spellcraft, segregating divine/arcane/psionics among their skills, but unifying use magic divice/use psionic device/use religious device.

For example, to identify a power you make a knowledge psionics roll. To identify an arcane spell you make a knowledge arcana roll. To identify a divine miracle you make a knowledge religion roll. To use an arcane wand you make a use supernatural device check. To use a divine staff you make a use supernatural device check. To use a power stone you make a use supernatural device check.

But I haven't implemented this in any game yet. I want to, but it will probably be a long time before I get a chance to.
MnemonicSV
07-25-07, 02:54 AM All I know is, should you choose to fold the magic and psionic versions of the skills together, make sure you do your homework to see how it affects other aspects of the game. As an example: If you were to fold UPD into UMD, but keep Psicraft and Spellcraft separate, how would the feats Psionic Affinity and Magical Aptitude now work? Would you nix both feats? Rewrite both? Leave them as-is and let them stack?

My personal opinion: If you fold one, fold them all. Less headaches that way.

Also remember, even if you don't fold them into each other, as a DM you are well within your right to create synergy bonuses to blur the line a little. For example: You could rule that 5 ranks of UPD gives a +2 synergy bonus to UMD, and vice-versa. The same could be said for Psicraft/Spellcraft and Knowledge (Psionics/Arcana/Religion) if you are so inclined. This tactic doesn't destroy the distinction, yet at the same time gives a nod to transparency.
AntiDjinn
07-25-07, 03:16 AM If you are going to keep them entirely separate, then take the next logical step and add Prayercraft and Use Ecclesiastic Device. The lack of flavor and separation for divinity has irked me since 3.0 dropped, so I certainly have no problem with this. In a 3.0 game we had a rogue make a UMD roll to use a divine device dedicated to the god of true knowledge, and he actually managed to fake out the deity who knows all, even with no personal religious training. With separate rules for ecclesiastic items that would not have happened.

The way I handle it is this: If a wizard is watching a cleric and psion both casting/manifesting Fabricate he has no clue what he is seeing before it goes off. He sees a guy brandishing a holy symbol and one who is just concentrating. Once he sees the effect he gets a Spellcraft roll to name the arcane spell (also called Fabricate) that would create the outcome he just witnessed. If the same wizard watched a kineticist manifest Energy Ball (Fire) then a Spellcraft roll would peg it as Fireball in effect, but he would be certain it was not cast through arcane means because the manifester didn't speak or fling bat poop. A blown roll might peg it as Fireball without realizing the effect is not arcane (he might think he just saw Stilled, Silent, Fireball with Eschewed Material). In any case, there is enough overlap in outcome that effects can generally be recognized by practitioners of any of the three major realms of power without needing to understand the methodology.
sijigs
07-25-07, 07:31 AM @Mnemonics

Synergy is also a good solution, too.. but +2 seems minor.
Azzy
07-25-07, 08:18 AM This was discussed a bit here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=879784) towards the end. Personally, Use Magic Device and Use Psionic Device should be rolled into the same skill. Spellcraft and Psicraft should remain separate, but should be usable for dealling with the oppsite (power/spell) effect at a -5 penalty (the same penalty that specialists face when dealing with a spell of an opposing school).
BloodSpill
07-26-07, 01:04 AM Spellcraft can already identify Arcane, Divine and Incarnum.
Knowledge (arcana) and Knowledge (religion) can be used regarding Pact Magic.

I'm sure Psicraft seemed like a good idea at the time, but it's not as fair anymore as it used to be.
MnemonicSV
07-26-07, 03:41 AM Synergy is also a good solution, too.. but +2 seems minor.

All synergy bonuses are +2 (until you hit epic anyway), thus it's no more "minor" than any other synergy bonus.

If a larger bonus is desired, than perhaps creating a special kind of bonus for this purpose is in order. Call it a "transparency bonus" if you like, and make it apply as the synergy bonus would.

I wouldn't recommend creating new bonus types though. If you want to keep the skills all separate, yet show that there is at least some small fundamental similarities, then a standard synergy bonus is certainly called for. It may not seem like much if you are of the "110% transparency" guard, but it is a no-hassle, simple-to-execute, rules-supported solution which doesn't require any core rule rewrites or clumsy houserules to enforce.

Perfect for the "DM-on-the-go," so to speak.

It also slices, dices, and makes julian fries! :D
Jhaelen
07-26-07, 04:19 AM I'm using Psionics/Magic transparency in my campaign. I've read all the old posts and it was mentioned that many DM's choose to collapse spellcraft and psicraft into a single skill, as well as collapsing use magic device and use psionic device into a single skill.IMC psicraft = spellcraft & umd = upd. Worked fine so far.
Zarreth_Nessad
07-26-07, 06:40 AM Spellcraft and Psicraft should remain separate, but should be usable for dealling with the oppsite (power/spell) effect at a -5 penalty (the same penalty that specialists face when dealing with a spell of an opposing school).

I like this solution when combined with what I've already stated... *implements in personal rulings*
Roflin
07-30-07, 02:34 PM Thanks to everyone for all the advice on this. We're going to try it with keeping the skills separate. I need to make sure that there are opportunities in the campaign for the one Psion character to use the Psicraft skill. If he uses it enough then other players might even be inspired to take a rank in it. Maybe the rogue might even want to take a rank in UPD.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Roflin 07-24-07, 05:35 PM	I'm using Psionics/Magic transparency in my campaign. I've read all the old posts and it was mentioned that many DM's choose to collapse spellcraft and psicraft into a single skill, as well as collapsing use magic device and use psionic device into a single skill. I need to decide whether or not to do this in my campaign. My initial intention was to make them the same skill, but I read somwhere (SRD?) that skills and feats are not transparent unless they say they are. I am now leaning towards keeping them separate. Is there a consensus out there as to what the majority of DM's are doing on this?
InkBlot 07-24-07, 06:07 PM	Skills and feats are not transparent. Spells and powers are transparent. That's how the rules work. Now, whether or not those rules are a good idea is up to every individual player and DM. Ditto, whether or not to use the rules as the are written is up to every individual gamming group. I've both used RAW and eschewed RAW (making the skills transparent). Both turned out fine. In one game, the players were foreigners colonizing a new land across the sea, and I wanted to emphasize the difference between the artificial arcane magic of the old world and the natural psychic abilities of the natives. So I made the skills non-transparent. It didn't make much difference, especialy since there was a psion in the party. In another game, I wanted it to be a simple hack/slash affair, and I wanted to allow the flavor of divine/arcane/psionic to bleed across the mechanical distinctions. So I made the skills transparent. It didn't make much difference either, since it's just a hack/slash game. The players were suprised when the evil kobold "sorcerer" manifested swarm of crystals on them, but that was because I exploited the player's metagame knowledge. It was not because the skills were transparent. Having the skills be transparent has allowed me to include both dorjes and wands in treasure, without worrying about whether or not the party factotum has ranks in Use Psionic Device or Use Magic Device.
ChimericalWolf 07-24-07, 06:58 PM	One of the main arguments I have for combining Spellcraft/Psicraft and UMD/UPD is the lack of distinction between Arcanecraft and Divinecraft, and Use Arcane Device and Use Divine Device.
Ralp 07-24-07, 08:09 PM	DM's choose to collapse spellcraft and psicraft into a single skill, as well as collapsing use magic device and use psionic device into a single skill. I need to decide whether or not to do this in my campaign. My initial intention was to make them the same skill, but I read somwhere (SRD?) that skills and feats are not transparent unless they say they are. I am now leaning towards keeping them separate. If you want to hedge your bets, maybe allow characters to use one for the other at, say, a -4 penalty. It's worked out alright in my campaign so far. Knowledge (Psionics) and (Arcana) are kept fully separate.
CrimsonDeath 07-24-07, 08:13 PM	Originally, the main reason I would've rolled Use Psionic Device and Use Magic Device together was because of how many magic items there are and how few psionic items there were. Now, with the Magic Item Compendium, it's clear that most "magic" items can be crafted by a psionicist. It makes little sense for there to exist two mechanically identical items, of which a character with Use Magic Device can activate one but not the other.
Zarreth_Nessad 07-24-07, 08:26 PM	In the games I run, which is usually in my own form of FR, Spellcraft, Psicraft, Kn. (Arcana), & Kn. (Psionics) are all separate skills, but I combine UMD & UPD since they aren't necessarily reliant on what made them, but rather on how they work. As to the separation of Divine/Arcane/Psionic, in FR Magic & Psionics are transparent, just like Divine & Arcane (aka they're lumped into the same category of "Magic", not separated to determine transparency with Psionics). Divine magic and Arcane magic are generally based on the same schools, rules, etc, but Psionic "magic" is based on somewhat different "schools", having different distinctions. Therefore, the learning of the types of magic (Arcane, Divine & Psionic) is separate (the knowledge skills), the practice between Psionic and the other two is different (Psicraft vs Spellcraft), and the use of the devices, having generally the same kind of triggers, is the same (combine UMD & UPD). This is just my reasoning of why I do things the way I do (I like having explanations for everything). Also, I agree with CrimsonDeath's prior statement, about it not making sense with the Magic Item Compendium combining Magical creation & Psionic creation.
sijigs 07-25-07, 02:02 AM	If you want to hedge your bets, maybe allow characters to use one for the other at, say, a -4 penalty. It's worked out alright in my campaign so far. Knowledge (Psionics) and (Arcana) are kept fully separate. I proposed complete transparency with Psi/Spellcraft and UPD/UMD to my fellow players and got a steep beating the other week. :( My argument was how Divine/Arcane worked together blah blah I completely agree with the above statement. Perhaps new material or 4.0 will cover this.
Lycanthromancer 07-25-07, 02:06 AM	This is Wizards of the Coast we're talking about. Not Psions of the Coast. I don't think that's gonna happen any time soon, as is evidenced by Complete Psionic. Psigh
InkBlot 07-25-07, 02:35 AM	I've toyed around with the idea of ditching psicraft and spellcraft, segregating divine/arcane/psionics among their skills, but unifying use magic divice/use psionic device/use religious device. For example, to identify a power you make a knowledge psionics roll. To identify an arcane spell you make a knowledge arcana roll. To identify a divine miracle you make a knowledge religion roll. To use an arcane wand you make a use supernatural device check. To use a divine staff you make a use supernatural device check. To use a power stone you make a use supernatural device check. But I haven't implemented this in any game yet. I want to, but it will probably be a long time before I get a chance to.
MnemonicSV 07-25-07, 02:54 AM	All I know is, should you choose to fold the magic and psionic versions of the skills together, make sure you do your homework to see how it affects other aspects of the game. As an example: If you were to fold UPD into UMD, but keep Psicraft and Spellcraft separate, how would the feats Psionic Affinity and Magical Aptitude now work? Would you nix both feats? Rewrite both? Leave them as-is and let them stack? My personal opinion: If you fold one, fold them all. Less headaches that way. Also remember, even if you don't fold them into each other, as a DM you are well within your right to create synergy bonuses to blur the line a little. For example: You could rule that 5 ranks of UPD gives a +2 synergy bonus to UMD, and vice-versa. The same could be said for Psicraft/Spellcraft and Knowledge (Psionics/Arcana/Religion) if you are so inclined. This tactic doesn't destroy the distinction, yet at the same time gives a nod to transparency.
AntiDjinn 07-25-07, 03:16 AM	If you are going to keep them entirely separate, then take the next logical step and add Prayercraft and Use Ecclesiastic Device. The lack of flavor and separation for divinity has irked me since 3.0 dropped, so I certainly have no problem with this. In a 3.0 game we had a rogue make a UMD roll to use a divine device dedicated to the god of true knowledge, and he actually managed to fake out the deity who knows all, even with no personal religious training. With separate rules for ecclesiastic items that would not have happened. The way I handle it is this: If a wizard is watching a cleric and psion both casting/manifesting Fabricate he has no clue what he is seeing before it goes off. He sees a guy brandishing a holy symbol and one who is just concentrating. Once he sees the effect he gets a Spellcraft roll to name the arcane spell (also called Fabricate) that would create the outcome he just witnessed. If the same wizard watched a kineticist manifest Energy Ball (Fire) then a Spellcraft roll would peg it as Fireball in effect, but he would be certain it was not cast through arcane means because the manifester didn't speak or fling bat poop. A blown roll might peg it as Fireball without realizing the effect is not arcane (he might think he just saw Stilled, Silent, Fireball with Eschewed Material). In any case, there is enough overlap in outcome that effects can generally be recognized by practitioners of any of the three major realms of power without needing to understand the methodology.
sijigs 07-25-07, 07:31 AM	@Mnemonics Synergy is also a good solution, too.. but +2 seems minor.
Azzy 07-25-07, 08:18 AM	This was discussed a bit here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=879784) towards the end. Personally, Use Magic Device and Use Psionic Device should be rolled into the same skill. Spellcraft and Psicraft should remain separate, but should be usable for dealling with the oppsite (power/spell) effect at a -5 penalty (the same penalty that specialists face when dealing with a spell of an opposing school).
BloodSpill 07-26-07, 01:04 AM	Spellcraft can already identify Arcane, Divine and Incarnum. Knowledge (arcana) and Knowledge (religion) can be used regarding Pact Magic. I'm sure Psicraft seemed like a good idea at the time, but it's not as fair anymore as it used to be.
MnemonicSV 07-26-07, 03:41 AM	Synergy is also a good solution, too.. but +2 seems minor. All synergy bonuses are +2 (until you hit epic anyway), thus it's no more "minor" than any other synergy bonus. If a larger bonus is desired, than perhaps creating a special kind of bonus for this purpose is in order. Call it a "transparency bonus" if you like, and make it apply as the synergy bonus would. I wouldn't recommend creating new bonus types though. If you want to keep the skills all separate, yet show that there is at least some small fundamental similarities, then a standard synergy bonus is certainly called for. It may not seem like much if you are of the "110% transparency" guard, but it is a no-hassle, simple-to-execute, rules-supported solution which doesn't require any core rule rewrites or clumsy houserules to enforce. Perfect for the "DM-on-the-go," so to speak. It also slices, dices, and makes julian fries! :D
Jhaelen 07-26-07, 04:19 AM	I'm using Psionics/Magic transparency in my campaign. I've read all the old posts and it was mentioned that many DM's choose to collapse spellcraft and psicraft into a single skill, as well as collapsing use magic device and use psionic device into a single skill.IMC psicraft = spellcraft & umd = upd. Worked fine so far.
Zarreth_Nessad 07-26-07, 06:40 AM	Spellcraft and Psicraft should remain separate, but should be usable for dealling with the oppsite (power/spell) effect at a -5 penalty (the same penalty that specialists face when dealing with a spell of an opposing school). I like this solution when combined with what I've already stated... implements in personal rulings
Roflin 07-30-07, 02:34 PM	Thanks to everyone for all the advice on this. We're going to try it with keeping the skills separate. I need to make sure that there are opportunities in the campaign for the one Psion character to use the Psicraft skill. If he uses it enough then other players might even be inspired to take a rank in it. Maybe the rogue might even want to take a rank in UPD.