Post/Author/DateTime	Post
celestialkin 06-19-07, 11:13 PM	OK. I feel like screaming out in anger right now. During my current weekly campaign I have been playing a Psion using the XPH. During our whole adventure my DM has known that I can't stand Complete Psionics, and after or before each gaming session I usually end up in a discussion with one of my party members over the book, since he is a fan of it. The DM has heard most of our conversations, and has never really mentioned anything about the book, though he regularly states that "Psionics are overpowered". Don't get me wrong, the guy has let me play my Psion and he hasn't given me a hard time about it, but he kind of put me in a bad position right now. During our last gaming session my character leveled, and I decided to have him take Astral Construct as an extra power using the Expanded Knowledge feat. Him using this power saved the party's life during the session, and my party members later on said it was a great idea to have this power (we are a total of 3 casters doing The Expedition to the Demonweb Pits adventure, so we've been taking quite a few poundings). So, over the weekend I decided to buy around $50 worth of Astral Constructs models online (The large ones are expensive rares, and the common medium sized ones are expensive because they are out of print) to have them for my games. However, today while we were hanging around our local gaming store some of our group started talking about a new book, which is coming out that is nothing but rules for the DM and errata. One thing leads to another and he tells us that since Complete Psionics is errata I need to use whatever rules are in there. Not only does this make my recent purchase worthless, but it also changes a lot more things about my character that I am not happy with (pretty much the whole character). I didn't mention this to them at the time, but it will definitely cause some problem this week at our game. I don't really know what to do at this point. I refuse to use the Complete Psionic rules, and I am not just going to make another character in another class, especially after the money I blew on these figures. Then again, no other DM at our local store will allow me to use Psionics in their games (3 of the regular 5 are actually in our game right now) because they all believe it's broken, so it's either this campaign using the Complete Psionics rules or nothing.
Azzy 06-19-07, 11:25 PM	Just suck it up and make a cleric or druid....
Scion of Coldshard 06-19-07, 11:33 PM	Just suck it up and make a cleric or druid.... celestialkin: "And these 3 medium astral constructs represent 3 wolves since apparently a single astral construct is too tough to keep track of but 3 wolves are incredibly easy. Next round I will use this combination of feats that I have to summon up these 2 large sized astral constructs which will represent some sort of elemental, whatever type it is that I need to destroy the opposing force. If that shows signs of weakening I will maximize out these 5 small size astral constructs and simply surround and destroy anything that is a problem. Good thing you banned my astral constructs, wow would that have been disruptive huh?"
AntiDjinn 06-19-07, 11:40 PM	Make a druid. In every battle spam summon various nature's allies. Fill the battlefield with monkies, Giant Eagles, Thoqqua, and dire boars. Spend lots of time getting the stats for each out of the Monster Manual (remember, all the stats you need to play astral constructs are in the XPH). Next round summon something else and then make sure each thing you summon takes complex actions that takes as long to resolve as a PC's turn. Eventually you will be taking more actions than the rest of the party combined, even if some of your level 1 and 2 allies never actually manage to hit. If he complains then point out that you are following the rules as printed and it obviously must be fair and balanced because it is not psionic.
Tempest Stormwind 06-20-07, 12:18 AM	Take the people who consider it broken and relay them here. I can promise we will be exactly as calm and civil about it as they will be, and we'll discuss it. As for the other DM, the one you're currently under, point him to countless threads on how summoning is generally suboptimal (exceptions being druids with lots of feats to make it work, or constructors (also with lots of feats to make it work, but they get less of an effect)). Point him to the parts of CPsi that make little or no mechanical sense (Illithid Blast is a popular one). Or, you could even point him to Bruce Cordell's website (http://homepage.mac.com/macbrucecordell/B1283663648/C608165187/E20060406204054/index.html), where he makes (in the comments) the following points:The Astral Construct was the most broken thing about XPH according to every game run by in-house designers, and more importantly, in-house developers. The 'nerf' that limits manifesters to a single construct at a time hardly touches the fact these things are still much better than summoned creatures at most levels. That said, different people have different experiences in their games depending on the rules they've used or chosen not to use. If a particular DM is having trouble with Bestow Power or Synch, then by god, he shouldn't allow it, right? If a DM thinks multiple astral constructs rampaging through his game world is fine, then she can ignore the update (but I wouldn't). .... We use a lot of psionics in in-house games, and the most abused power BY FAR was astral construct. This was most abusable by wilders who could manifest the power at a higher level if they use Wild Surge on Astral Construct and end up with a construct of a higher level than they could normally have. This borders on exploitation, but it falls into the territory of actual abuse if a wilder can get multiple too-high level constructs. It destroys the game. But beyond that, from a game-play perspective, every summoned creature or animal companion a player brings to the table is more attention that player sucks from other players who do not have multiple creatures to control. As a game-play guiding principle, going forward as we have the opportunity, we would like to see characters with a limit of one non-character entity they can control at any one time. This way we can divide the 'spot-light' of the DM's attention more evenly among the players. ... I said going forward, as possible, we will look to reducing the number of companions to 1--this is a goal. It is not a hard and fast rule that will be applied in all cases and for all time. ... Here's my final word on the astral construct issue--if you are a DM and don't have a problem with the way your players are using Astral Construct, then ignore the one-at-a-time limitation described in Complete Psionic. However, if you're a DM and you've been worried about your player who has been populating the combat grid with custom-made nasties, now you've got some official backing. Note: I know what it feels like to lose a cherished character shtick--I can empathize with that; I felt the same way when 3.5 decided wizards could no longer cast two spells a round when hasted. In fact, I lobbied against the change at the time. Now, a few years later, I don't give it a second thought. (I'll leave it up to you to decide why that is.) ... [Editor's Note: This was said in response to why powers haven't been changed in the official errata.] If a power is playable as written, wizards doesn't like to errata it. However, if there are tweaks we'd like to make, and we are writing a book that most fans will pick up, that is seen as a good place to include the update. For instance, Wizards updated many spells in Spell Compendium without errating all the original books those spells appeared in.Lots of information. Let's deal with it one paragraph at a time. 1) You can mathematically demonstrate that an astral construct with Boost Construct is comparable to an earth elemental of the same HD. Without Boost Construct, it's comparable to an earth elemental but with far more limited offensive options. This doesn't touch on the fact that there are better summoned monsters out there (notably any one with spells or spell-like abilities; I often cite the unicorn as a simple example) and that there are better feats (Rashimi Elemental Summoning is a classic example -- not only does it turn your earth and air elementals into freaking badass beasts, it also gives them spell-like abilities, and good ones at that!). 2) He's comitting the Oberoni Fallacy here. 3a) Perhaps the reason it was the most popular EK power is because the psion is a fragile caster-type (well, unless they know the right tricks, the best of which involve being an egoist) and Astral Construct was the only summoning-type make-me-a-meatshield power out there? Or maybe it's because telepaths were really, really popular (they get amazing powers and are a classic psionic archetype) but have most of their powers cease functioning against huge elements of the game (any mind-immunes), thus a single feat to provide them with utility and something to use against these scenarios is a good investment? 3b) If the problem was the strength of the constructs, why not nerf the constructs? (For the record, the only stat they have that is high for their CR is their natural armor. You can verify this for yourself here (http://megariqueza.com/DnD/CritterFilter.php).) Even WITH the nerf, wilders (who have so few powers that they're expected to gain EK feats, and have Wild Surge so they can use those few powers very powerfully) can still produce constructs that are (in his mind) too strong for their level. (Also, for most of the time, the best a wilder can manage is one, maybe two levels of construct above the party shaper with Overchannel. This is at most +1 CR at the cost of playing a subpar class. I should show Bruce something like Greenbound Summoning or Beckon the Frozen one of these days.) 4a) Speaking as a constructor, I can safely say that my turn on the game table with multiple constructs (usually one to three, which is coincidentally about the same as you'd get with a single Summon Monster spell, although mine took me that many rounds and far more power points to do!) typically takes less time to resolve than our double-scimitar-wielding critical-hit-specialist ranger's turn, because the constructs are functionally nothing more than warriors. I also typically have time to combine this with description that the other players have actually stopped and said things like "Okay, that was cool" at. The ONE (and only) time where this hasn't been the case is when I used a special swarm ability from one of Bruce's Hyperconscious PrCs, which gave me an extra astral construct as a free action every round for a round per level. I wasn't used to controlling that many at once (I had five little ones and a regular big construct going at once) and I had to cut out my description; it took roughly thirty seconds more than the ranger's turn in this one circumstance. This ability I speak of is usable once per day, and the constructs produced aren't very tough for the level you gain it, so it's most useful in mook encounters. Maybe I'm unusual in this regard, but I've never noticed summoning taking long at the table unless the player isn't used to it -- but you see this same effect with ANY character that involves a lot of rolls (case in point, the TWF-crit character above). 4b) Yeah, we're still waiting on ANY spell or effect change for the casters to limit them to just one summon. Meanwhile, they get multi-creature summons from level 3 onward, while psions have to wait until level 14 (and even THAT requires nine levels in a particular, super-specialized prestige class that costs you an ML to gain). 5) Since Complete Psionic, we've seen Complete Mage, Complete Scoundrel, and Complete Champion, not to mention a few other books (notably from Eberron). Not a single such change to summoning was made, and in fact at least three PrCs were made in these books that center around summoning (the master specialist (conjuration), the malconvoker, and the planar shepherd). There's probably others as well. The first of these -- the master specialist -- actually gains the ability to summon faster than usual, meaning that in the three rounds it took me to get my three constructs, he can throw out 6-15 other little critters. These critters also often have magical effects to manage instead of simply having strong attacks. 6) There, he said it -- if you didn't have a problem with it, ignore the ruling. Given his terminology, I'm also seriously doubting anyone's EVER played a druid at Bruce's game table. 7) The fact that he lobbied against haste giving faster spellcasting but only recently figured out why speaks volumes about his knee-jerk balance position, right? Like the kind of balance decision he'd make after seeing a wilder with Astral Construct? 8) There you have it! It's NOT errata, and Astral Construct is playable as written! In short, I see no reason whatsoever for your DM to go with this ruling without testing it first. Do note that in my experience, it's rare that you'll find a situation where pumping out construct after construct after construct is preferrable to tossing out one, maybe two, and then actually joining the battle with your ectoplasmic minions. Note that this would take two rounds, as compared to the one every wizard, sorcerer, cleric, and druid would need to get multiple minions.
Sarlax 06-20-07, 01:56 AM	If your DM intends to carry out the "errata" simply because it exists, threaten to switch to a druid summoning specialist. Take Spell Focus (Conjuration), Augment Summoning, Greenbuond Summoning (Lost Empires of Faerun), Ashbound, and Beckon the Frozen (Frostburn). All of your summoned allies will be plants with the cold subtype, extra slam attacks, +1d6 cold damage per natural attack, at will spell like abilities, fast healing, tremorsense, greatly enhanced ability scores, last twice as long, and have a +3 luck bonus on all attack rolls. Oh yeah - you can still have as many as you want. I run a game with two summoners (a druid and a dread necromancer). It doesn't significantly slow the game. In most cases, a summoned creature make an attack and that's it. In some cases, there's a special attack, like a wolf's trip, but after a couple rounds the trip roll is a reflex. I see no reason to screw psions (the newest character will be an erudite/incarnate with Astral Construct) just for being psions.
celestialkin 06-20-07, 02:23 AM	I appreciate you guys taking the time to answer my questions and help me with this. I'll try talking to him and the group about forgetting the whole Complete Psionics errata. If that doesn't work I'll do the whole druid thing.
Tyroki 06-20-07, 08:08 AM	Also send them to the Myth: Psionics is overpowered, threads. =3 That should give them a right slap in the face. If it doesn't, said druid will >.>
Fafnir 06-20-07, 08:47 AM	Also send them to the Myth: Psionics is overpowered, threads. =3 That should give them a right slap in the face. If it doesn't, said druid will >.> My experience is that most people will stop thinking that only after they play a psion with a highly competent DM. I was lucky myself as my DM allowed psi, but for a long time the rest of my group was wary due to my optimizing skills and subsequent powerful Telepaths and Kineticists. Of course, now it's slowly changing, beetween me being the DM and having a good grasp of the psi rules, and people trying and failing to screw me over. :D But my experience tells me there need to be two... or a highly determined one.
Bacris 06-20-07, 08:50 AM	Yup, I would basically tell the DM "Look, by incorporating these rules that didn't exist when I built my character, you've essentially made my character worthless. Can we just use the rules we've been using, since it hasn't caused an issue?" If he still presses it, then say "Fine, I'll just play a druid." I know that if I as a DM ever heard that sentence, it would make me absolutely cringe.
Tyroki 06-20-07, 09:09 AM	I know that if I as a DM ever heard that sentence, it would make me absolutely cringe. Having never played one as I'm new to D&D, are they honestly that horrible to comprehend? Are they honestly that badass? O.o
Bacris 06-20-07, 09:16 AM	It truly depends on the player. But the druid is by far the easiest class to use to introduce horrible game imbalance. Between their spontaneous summoning of powerful creatures with spell-like abilities to their built-in class feature to shapechange into some extremely potent animal forms as well as some of the best buff spells, combined with a d8 HD, average BAB, 2 good saves, and 4 skill points per level, yes, they are quite badass. I played a druid once just to see what all the fuss was about. Never again, because I felt dirty at trivializing so much content.
The_Shaman 06-20-07, 09:58 AM	In my first and short-lived group we had a player with no prior experience with D&D than NWN play a druid. The wolf alone - which he seldom let more than 10 feet away from his person - did as much as the fighter. An optimized druid is, well something serious, and I think equalling one is the acid test of powerful builds over at the Character Optimization boards. Anyway, if the DM has not had a problem so far, I do not think he should make it an issue now. If it ain't broken, don't fix it.
Fleem 06-20-07, 10:48 AM	I'm not sure what the big deal here is. So your DM imposed pseudo-errata nerfs on you. You can now bring in only one of those constructs at a time. Presumably, some of you other powers are also affected. You've tried sweet reason, to no avail. The proposed solution? Rules whip until your DM begs for mercy! You'll show him who's boss! Oh, wait.. He is, isn't he? Since he's running the game, I'm sure he can find some way to neutralize any sort of cheese you want to pull (dispel trumps summon?). Maybe he'll apply the one-critter summoning limit nerf to your druid. I'm sure you'll feel very self-righteous for having "shown him". Of course, then you'll be stuck with lots of expensive animal and elemental minis that you can't use... As another option, why not just ask if you can tweak your character, since he changed the rules after the fact? If you don't like constructs, now that you only get one at a time, swap it out for something else. If you absolutely can't abide psionics using CPsi, switch to something else. This is supposed to be a game; if you're not having fun, getting into a fight isn't going to help.
Tempest Stormwind 06-20-07, 11:06 AM	Note: The druid really *is* that badass. In the absence of any other information, the CO boards will always suggest Druid 20 as a front-runner build in terms of both power and versatility. The term "CoDzilla" refers to this approach that people are describing: It bears saying: if up against a logic-impervious DM who thinks Core is balanced and Psionics (or Warlocks, or Fochlucan Lyrists, or anything balanced that's come out of splatbooks that aren't munchfests like Complete Divine) isn't, then the most powerful way to disprove that is to play a C.o.D. (Cleric or Druid). Noncore material will not be necessary unless you are going for pure overkill (Draconic Wildshape? Divine Metamagic?). So by all means, if you must win that argument, take you C.o.D. to town. Annihilate the opposition. Make the NPCs and other players scream "Oh no, it's C.o.D.zilla!!!!!" in badly dubbed English. Breathe radioactive fire. Knock down buildings. Then stomp out of the burning Tokyo that is the ruins of the game and swim off into the ocean, seeking a DM with some basic cognitive functions. The problem with this, of course, is that if you play a summoning druid (far stronger than your current character) the DM has a very good chance of going "Wow, that's strong. And WotC thinks that AC is even stronger. I'll REALLY keep that nerf there, and I might extend it to the druid as well." This runs counter to your purpose. If you do bust out CoDzilla: 1) Don't play a summoner, and 2) Read this. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=733400)
SlanderPanic 06-20-07, 11:51 AM	I agree with everything Tempest has said in this thread.
Racinante 06-20-07, 12:06 PM	I'm not sure what the big deal here is. So your DM imposed pseudo-errata nerfs on you. You can now bring in only one of those constructs at a time. Presumably, some of you other powers are also affected. You've tried sweet reason, to no avail. ... As another option, why not just ask if you can tweak your character, since he changed the rules after the fact? If you don't like constructs, now that you only get one at a time, swap it out for something else. If you absolutely can't abide psionics using CPsi, switch to something else. This is supposed to be a game; if you're not having fun, getting into a fight isn't going to help. Another option is to compromise. Ask for a limit of two instead of one. I personally agree with the CPsi errata, although other portions definitely need work.
Zemyla 06-20-07, 12:44 PM	I agree with everything Tempest has said in this thread. Same here, except remove "in this thread".
SlanderPanic 06-20-07, 12:50 PM	I would say that, but I don't always see eye-to-eye with him. I respect his opinions, certainly, and I'd love to game with him. But he isn't right about everything. There are actually a lot of folks from this board I'd love to game with. Maybe we should organize a "Psionicon" of some sort, perhaps as a room party during another con.
Bacris 06-20-07, 12:58 PM	I hope to be at Gen Con Indy next year :) This year just wasn't in the budget... but I'd be down for that! Whether that's with my own booth or not remains to be seen.
Tyroki 06-20-07, 01:00 PM	Yay for playing D&D over the interwebs ^^
SlanderPanic 06-20-07, 01:01 PM	Hoping to have a Dreamscarred Press booth, Bacris? That would be beyond awesome.
Lycanthromancer 06-20-07, 01:13 PM	What do I do now that I am forced to use Complete Psionics errata?Force him to watch Biodome, with Pauly Shore. Tell him this is what he did to your character. See if he can live with that decision.
Bacris 06-20-07, 01:19 PM	Hoping to have a Dreamscarred Press booth, Bacris? That would be beyond awesome. Hoping to - it's a bit costly, but might be able to share a booth - I know a few publishers who are doing that for GenCon this year. I was really hoping to do it this year, but the cost of printing / illustrations bit us pretty hard, so it wasn't an option.
Rageheart 06-20-07, 01:56 PM	Ask if you can trade AC out for one of the Complete Psionics powers such as: 2nd Level: Elemental Steward or Larval Flayers 4th Level: Ectoplasmic Swarm or Shadow Eft 7th Level: Planar Champion All of which "Summon" without limiting you to 1 active at a time. Then smile at your DM after spamming Larval Flayers all over his BBEG and say "Thank goodness you approved the Errata in CPsi... Astral Constructs would have been WAY too much." :D
lears_fool 06-20-07, 04:02 PM	I feel it's important to make a counter-observation here. As much as I don't like the AC Nerf in the Complete Psi, the answer to the 'what do I do with these rules I don't like' question is the same as it is and should be in any other thread or forum. You accept it and make the best of it, and you DON'T get into arguments with the DM over his gameworld and rules. I make tons of rulings all the time, some of which counter resources you can find online. And guess what, a player trying to argue with me is NOT going to help things. Now, if he says 'I expected x and ended up with y and wondered if you had any ideas on how to make this work because it seems to be okay for z' then maybe I'll come up with some middle ground or even something that fuels things positively in some other way. But 'he's wrong and I'm right, these other guys say so too' isn't likely to get you very far and might hurt the game you're playing in, nor is 'fine, then I'll do something abusive'
Rageheart 06-20-07, 04:18 PM	True, ...however it sounds like the DM sprung the change on him mid-game and killed the character concept for the player in doing so. While I do concur that a player trying to brow beat the DM into changing his mind is futile, the DM should have some consideration of the players and be open to friendly discussion. If the DM does not allow the players to have fun with their characters, the players will walk.
MaverickWolf 06-20-07, 04:19 PM	The biggest issue here, however, doesn't much apply to your counter-observation. The problem that exists is that not only did the DM choose to utilize an unnecessary 'errata' (which, by the way, cannot be called such, because errata is officially the new game rule, whereas Complete Psionic is still entirely optional), but the DM chose to do so AFTER the character had already been played under the old rules. Makings rulings that players may not agree with is going to happen, there's no doubt about that. However, changing rules mid-game that involve a concept currently in play is bad form, and really crappy DMing, especially when said rules haven't been causing problems in the game.
DrowBattlemind 06-20-07, 04:42 PM	Perhaps, but in my experience, 'playing nice' with DM's who haven't really read up on rules for certain character types (not just psi characters, I'm talking Warlocks, Wu Jen, or just about any non-fighter class in the complete guides) sometimes just doesn't work. They get the idea in their heads that "X is totally unbalanced, let's see what we can do to balance it", before getting all the facts. Folks who get that mindset usually completely ignore unbalanced aspects of the core rulebook (the druid they're using above is a fine example), or whichever book it is that they prize highest, and simply close off their minds. It reminds me of the 'inspirational posters' thread, the one that reads "Just a Single Word: It matters not how well written, balanced, or how great an improvement it is over past editions; A single word (psionics) apparently still makes it the most abominable thing ever to have graced any fantasy game, ever" It's often the willful ignorance that we encounter which raises the hackles of pro-psi gamers. I admit, there's some books that I just don't get, myself, like the Magic of the Incarna book. I [I]HEAR it's well written, and relatively balanced, but the way the writing of how the abilities work is worded in a way I just can't seem to wrap my brain around. However, I am willing to let one of my players try it on a limited basis (one or two one-off games) to test it out and see if its too munchkin or not. (said player is often a bit of a rules lawyer, so I'll set two other players familiar with the incarna rules to watch him and catch him if he tries to blow smoke up my kilt.)
lears_fool 06-20-07, 05:18 PM	Perhaps, but in my experience, 'playing nice' with DM's who haven't really read up on rules for certain character types (not just psi characters, I'm talking Warlocks, Wu Jen, or just about any non-fighter class in the complete guides) sometimes just doesn't work. They get the idea in their heads that "X is totally unbalanced, let's see what we can do to balance [i.e., squelch] it", before getting all the facts. Folks who get that mindset usually completely ignore unbalanced aspects of the core rulebook (the druid they're using above is a fine example), or whichever book it is that they prize highest, and simply close off their minds. I understand where you're coming from, and I personally think Psionics gets the short end of the stick in this respect. However, I'm very deliberately applying a universal rule that transcends my own personal opinions on psionics. If you're really on good terms with a DM and can constructively and positively work with him. . and he's comfortable that you're not trying to be 'uber' and are happy to be balanced with the group then there's a good chance something can be worked out. I've been able to push the envelope as a player like that because the DM has no fear (and rightfully so) that I'm trying to take advantage. . and the same goes for players in my campaigns. If not however, and you're feeling a need to 'prove' something or are upset then the odds are you're just going to hurt the campaign. No good ever comes of forcing something down a DM's craw, especially if he's not very comfortable with either it or you (enough so that this situation doesn't come up) It's either collaborative and positive or it's a bad idea.
Lycanthromancer 06-20-07, 05:41 PM	It reminds me of the 'inspirational posters' thread, the one that reads "Just a Single Word: It matters not how well written, balanced, or how great an improvement it is over past editions; A single word (psionics) apparently still makes it the most abominable thing ever to have graced any fantasy game, ever"At the risk of sounding like a complete newbie... YAY! I was quoted!
pud 06-20-07, 08:22 PM	Astral Construct was a BS power before the errata in Complete Psionic, as evidenced by the oceanic tears shed here at the time and the whining the bereaved continue to snivel. It was a level one power that dominated the game at any character level.
Lycanthromancer 06-20-07, 08:25 PM	Because it's an incredible utility power. Its power isn't so much monster-pwnage so much as a portable wall. Compare that to summon monster **, where a wizard can heal an entire epic-level party for a single low-level spell. Or gain XP-free wishes. ...Where's that balance again?
Tyroki 06-20-07, 10:01 PM	Yeah I've heard of wizards being able to do that... I'd say the best option is to talk to the DM. If he continues to disagree, even after screwing your character up, take the path of forcing the imbalance of other classes down his throat, then ask him how broken Psionics is then. Also say "You could have saved alot of trouble you know. The constructs are alot weaker than all of these. People just discriminate because they can't be bothered reading the rules to find out for themselves." Hate to say it, but... If it comes down to it... Optimize. But keep away from Psionics while you're doing it.
Azzy 06-20-07, 10:03 PM	Astral Construct was a BS power before the errata in Complete Psionic, as evidenced by the oceanic tears shed here at the time and the whining the bereaved continue to snivel. It was a level one power that dominated the game at any character level. Oh, jeez, can you get any more wrongheaded?
AdventChild 06-20-07, 10:10 PM	Astral Construct was a BS power before the errata in Complete Psionic, as evidenced by the oceanic tears shed here at the time and the whining the bereaved continue to snivel. It was a level one power that dominated the game at any character level. :eek: Blasphemy!!! anyways, try to reason with your DM then i suggest you go with the CODZILLA thing but dont threaten the dm just agree you will change your char and use the CODZILLA and prove your point... some people cant jsut be reasoned with and need to see things with their own eyes. But dont take it too personal... that might just ruin the game for everyone.
Tyroki 06-20-07, 10:15 PM	Yeah... I'm using Astral Construct now as a level 1 shaper... While it's saved our asses, in no way has it broken the campaign. I just use it to help the party fighter flank enemies while I heal or use damage powers, or if necessary, use a construct as a wall between lots of enemies and myself. It saved against the 6 undead wolves the DM threw at us at level 2. But being a full round to make it, you can't do anything else, so it's slow. I see balance there. Stop one enemy, bang, the others up your rear and ripping you apart. But thats where your party comes in handy. I fail to see how the Astral Construct is broken... I remember last campaign (Which ended early because it was going nowhere). My mate was a monk. A drunken monk >.> Damn he kicked ass. I mean... If the Astral Construct misses, then it's doing nothing other than being a wall. If it hits, well yay for you, but the fighters still going hard. The only reason we're calling my character the most efficient in the campaign right now, is because the Astral Construct has alot of utility and can be used in alot of situations. The fighter loves it because I can help him hit enemies more often. (His rolls have been terrible lately) The sorc likes it because it's been used as a wall between enemies, and also because it has alot of tactical use. The DM doesn't care that I can summon more than one. To him, it lets him pull a few bigger things than he normally could. It adds flavour, it has tactical use, and it has utility. But that doesn't mean its game breaking. It still has to hit enemies >.>
Lycanthromancer 06-20-07, 10:27 PM	http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g111/Lycanthromancer/codzilla.jpg
The_Shaman 06-21-07, 03:33 AM	Astral Construct was a BS power before the errata in Complete Psionic, as evidenced by the oceanic tears shed here at the time and the whining the bereaved continue to snivel. It was a level one power that dominated the game at any character level. Just in case you're not trolling-and-runnind, AC might have dominated a game or two (esp. if used by an inventive psion and the other chars were suboptimal), but it is not much better than any other summon. And while it is a lvl 1 power, if you want to summon a high-level monster, you will have to pay for it as much as for a power of your highest level. Yes, it is simpler to learn 1 spell than to learn 9. And that is it. Considering that iirc sorcerers (and maybe even battle sorcerers) know more spells than psions do powers, I don't really see the point.
turalisj 06-21-07, 06:29 AM	There was only one time I even got to use my astral construct. It wasn't for battle either. Certain members of our group had got themselves in jail, our Rogue and Barbarian. Our barbarian decided he was going to be the one to bluff his way out of it, and he was more than a little drunk...... Trog: Trog no do it! Trog see little green man do it! Anyone want to put 2 and 2 together?
wonlee76 06-21-07, 03:24 PM	The worst advice I've seen on this thread is to create an optimized druid summoner to slow down/prove that AC is not overpowered. The OP said this is the only DM that even allows psionics in his campaign. If the OP pisses off his DM with his uber summoning druid, guess what, he's going to get booted out of that campaign leaving him with zero DMs that will allow him to use psionics. Talking to the DM is a much better option. Communicate... explain your reasons why he shouldn't use any of the errata from Complete Psionics. Point him to the Psionics is overpowered Myth thread. In all honesty, I don't blame your DM for choosing to follow errata. Errata in general tends to nerf/weaken abilities, feats, spells or what have you. Don't be too surprised if the DM sticks to the errata only because if he waivers against your arguments about errata from Complete Psionics, it would set a precedent to argue against errata regarding other things like Invisible Blade, Divine metamagic, etc.
Bacris 06-21-07, 03:43 PM	Here's the thing: There's a difference between "official errata" and "different rules in different books". The rules in the Expanded Psionics Handbook have not been changed... the optional rules presented in Complete Psionic have changed things. That's very different from errata, where WotC basically says "whoops, we made a mistake, here's the way it should work." It may seem like splitting hairs, but it's a significant difference. And I'd never suggest trying to "break" a DM's game, but honestly, if my DM were being that stubborn over it to the point of wrecking my PC concept, I would flat out play a different character - if not simply drop out of the game entirely - because I know I won't have fun. I'm not saying I have to play a game-breaking character to have fun, but my experience has been those DMs that refuse to listen to arguments as to why the nerf isn't needed tend to be DMs who want to run heavy-handed games in general, which I don't enjoy. Your mileage may vary.