Post/Author/DateTime	Post
m o n k 01-05-08, 08:49 PM	Is there a good reason why someone would take Split Psionic Ray feat if they could just take the Quicken Power feat. SPR let's you hit two targets with any ray power. Using quicken Power would let you do the same thing, wouldn't it? You'd just be casting the ray twice instead of splitting it. Yes, it'll cost more in powerpoints to use the QP feat, but, IMO, that's made up for by the fact that it can be used to make double attacks with more than just rays. Not to mention all the other powers it can be applied to. I'm fairly certain I'm missing something in my analysis, but someone needs tell me how I've got it all wrong.
archerpwr 01-05-08, 08:52 PM	Why take quicken power when you can take EK(schism)?
m o n k 01-05-08, 09:00 PM	Why take quicken power when you can take EK(schism)? Yeah...that's gotten me thinking. BTW, what is EK? I figured you were talking about the Telepath Power Schism (4th level). Is that right? EDIT: Never mind. EK=Expanded Knowledge :blush:
InkBlot 01-06-08, 12:55 AM	It's cheaper. Way cheaper. Lets take 12th level as an example. Firing off a quickened crystal shard and a normal crystal shard in one round costs you 24 power points, your psionic focus, a swift action, and a standard action. Firing off a split crystal shard costs you only 12 power points, your psionic focus, and a standard action. You spent half as many power points, and you still have your swift action for any naturally swift powers. With the quickened example you're rolling 18d6, but with the split example you're rolling 20d6. Not to mention, you can use Split Ray on a power a whole four levels before you can quicken it. You can Split disintegrate at 13th level, when Quickened disintegrate is just a twinkle in your psion's eye. But if you really wanted to damage multiple creatures, you'd take an area-of-effect power or energy missile. Split Psionic Ray is just a little gimme for ray-specialists. It's for characters who take levels of Illithid Slayer just so they can qualify for Improved Critical (ray) before 16th level. Split Psionic Ray mitigates their one glaring weakness.
AntiDjinn 01-06-08, 03:47 AM	The fact that using a quickened and normal power in the same round uses both your swift and standard action can be a major tactical problem. If an opponent is sick you using Damp Power, Evade Burst, or Elan Resilience to nerf his attacks then it is just the sort of opportunity he will be watching for. Split Psionic Ray may not be versatile, but it is efficient both in point cost and action economy. Unless you don't actually have any powers that may normally be used as swift actions, it is often a good idea to keep that option open.
hovnarr 01-06-08, 06:56 AM	Antidjinn: Since the immediate action is taken from your swift action from the upcoming round, it's more a question of never being able to use quicken power to begin with under such circumstances. If you defended yourself with an immediate action on your opponent's turn, you can't quicken. However, if you had an unspent swift action when your count came up, you could use it for quicken and still be able to take an immediate action on your opponent's next turn ("borrowing" the swift action from your next turn).
AntiDjinn 01-06-08, 11:36 AM	You can only perform one swift action per round, regardless of where it came from. If you quicken a power, you loose the option to use an immediate action later in the same round because that would mean performing two swift actions in the same round. The fact that an immediate action is a swift action borrowed from your next turn does not allow you to do two of them in the same turn.
CrimsonDeath 01-06-08, 03:22 PM	You can only perform one swift action per round, regardless of where it came from. If you quicken a power, you loose the option to use an immediate action later in the same round because that would mean performing two swift actions in the same round. The fact that an immediate action is a swift action borrowed from your next turn does not allow you to do two of them in the same turn. That doesn't really make sense; it would mean an Immediate action would effectively use two Swift actions-- the one from your previous turn, and the one from your next turn. Also, what if you're at the bottom of the initiative count? By the time it's someone else's turn, it's a new "round". But then, does it really make sense for that to matter? Initiative is just an abstraction to give a logical order of actions and reactions, and once that order has been established, the number attached to a particular person's action doesn't really matter, only who's next. In general, I don't think abilities care where you are in the initiative count, only whether it's your turn or not.
hovnarr 01-06-08, 03:36 PM	Here it is: Immediate Actions Much like a swift action, an immediate action consumes a very small amount of time, but represents a larger expenditure of effort and energy than a free action. However, unlike a swift action, an immediate action can be performed at any time — even if it's not your turn. Casting feather fall is an immediate action, since the spell can be cast at any time. Using an immediate action on your turn is the same as using a swift action, and counts as your swift action for that turn. You cannot use another immediate action or a swift action until after your next turn if you have used an immediate action when it is not currently your turn (effectively, using an immediate action before your turn is equivalent to using your swift action for the coming turn). You also cannot use an immediate action if you are flat-footed. Is there any two ways to understand this? I can only see one: If you use an immediate action, it is for all effects and purposes as if you use your swift action for the coming turn. It counds towards NEXT turns one swift/round limit, not the present one.
DracoPhoenix 01-06-08, 06:04 PM	split ray's cheaper IIRC, but how about this one: Personally, I'd suggest : Empower + Meta-psionic mastery(Empower -> Energy missiles)) = +50% damage to up to 5 targets for free (or as I prefer, max pp/d6 augmentation). feat intensive* I know, but fits the multi-target requirement quite nicely. Also auto hits, ref for half - so usually always damages, though rogues might save for none. So, taking the L12 example you get (for 12pp / round) : 18d6 x 1-5 targets / round. That's roughly an average 63 damage per target, for a total (average) of 315 damage in one round against 5 targets. * Throw in a possible EK(Energy missiles) and Psi-meditation for optimum fire power. So, 3-4 feats, doable by L6 if you know Missiles, other wise, you may need to pick up M-P Mastery at L9. You'll able to hit em hard and reload in one round.
AntiDjinn 01-06-08, 10:39 PM	From the XPH p. 59: "A swift action consumes a very small amount of time, but represents a larger expenditure of effort and energy than a free action. You can perform one swift action per turn without affecting your ability to perform other actions. In that regard, a swift action is like a free action. However, you can only perform one swift action per turn, regardless of what other actions you take.. Once you have performed a swift action, you can't perform another that turn, not matter which orifice you have extracted said action from or whether or not it is taken from the next turn. So if you have used Resilience or Quicken Power, can you choose to use your next turn swift action as an immediate action now? No, because that would put two swift actions in a single turn, which can not happen regardless of whatever else you do that round. If it were otherwise, then you could actually use Resilience twice per round: Once at your option to blow off damage from something you are doing (stepping off a cliff or into acid), then again to blow off damage from something done to you (being targeted with a spell or power one the same turn).
TheKeyofE 01-06-08, 11:56 PM	Immediate actions specifically state that they use up your swift action for NEXT round, not THIS round. If this were the case, you would never want to use a swift action because it would mean not being able to use immediate actions for a whole round. This was never the intent of immediate actions, and would seriously screw a lot of stuff in both the XPH and ToB
AntiDjinn 01-07-08, 12:08 AM	One more time: I am not arguing about from when the action came. I am saying that the text does not allow you to use two in the same round. If you use a swift action in round 1 and also borrow the swift action from round 2, moving to round 1, then you have taken two swift actions in round 1. You can't cast Wings of Cover to avoid damage from walking through a Wall of Fire on your action, then use the spell again the same round to avoid damage from an opponent's attack. Even through the second may be borrowed from the following round, it still would amount to using two swift actions in one round.
MnemonicSV 01-07-08, 12:24 AM	I also disagree with this interpretation. The way I understand it, once your turn is over, and up until the point at which your next turn starts, you may use an immediate action. If you choose to use that immediate action, you may not use a swift action on your next turn, because you have used up the swift action for your next turn. This also precludes using more than one immediate action before your next turn. ---------- For example: On my turn, I take a standard action (and perhaps move my speed), perform any reasonable free actions, then as a swift action manifest a quickened power. My turn is now over... I have used all of my actions for that turn. However, when the enemy's turn comes up, he casts fireball at me. As an immediate action, I choose to manifest energy adaptation to lessen/negate the damage. I have now used up my swift action for my next turn. On my next turn, I take my standard action (and maybe a move as usual), any free actions, however I cannot take a swift action on this turn (as I have already used it to manifest energy adaptation as an immediate action). My turn is now over... I have used all of my actions for that turn. The enemy, on his turn, casts another fireball at me. I may, again, choose to manifest energy adaptation as an immediate action, again using up my swift action for my next turn. I may also choose not to do so, instead taking the damage, but opening up the option of taking a swift action on my next turn. ---------- Immediate actions aren't like "readied swift actions." You do not have to avoid taking a swift action on your turn in order to "reserve" the option of taking an immediate action on someone else's turn. Immediate actions use up your swift action for the next turn. Simple as that. You can indeed use Resilience to offset damage you take during your turn (assuming your turn isn't over yet) as a swift action, and then use it again to offset damage taken as a result of some other effect (on another's turn) as an immediate action. If you do, all you do is rule out the chance that you could, during your next turn, use Resilience again to offset damage as a swift action (since you used up that swift action as an immediate action before your current turn). (Wow. This could well be the only time I have ever completely disagreed with AntiDjinn on a ruling. Weird.)
MnemonicSV 01-07-08, 01:17 AM	As an afterthought, I think I know where the confusion is coming from. The powers in the XPH that may be manifested as a swift or immediate action contain the following phrase: ...like manifesting a quickened power, and it counts toward the normal limit of one quickened power per round. Emphasis mine. However, these phrases were all removed from immediate action powers by the official errata because it contradicted this part of the XPH (As quoted by AntiDjinn): "A swift action consumes a very small amount of time, but represents a larger expenditure of effort and energy than a free action. You can perform one swift action per turn without affecting your ability to perform other actions. In that regard, a swift action is like a free action. However, you can only perform one swift action per turn, regardless of what other actions you take.. Emphasis mine. Swift actions are indeed "measured" by the turn, not the round. Admittedly, the phrase which is causing the confusion should also have been errata'd out of all swift action powers as well. But hey, I think we can all agree that the text for swift and immediate actions override the text erroneously included in those specific powers. ---------- To the OP: Apologies that this thread has strayed so very far off topic.
hovnarr 01-07-08, 03:38 AM	One more time: I am not arguing about from when the action came. I am saying that the text does not allow you to use two in the same round. I agree with this, but still maintain that the immediate action that you took doesn't count towards this round's swift actions. Like this: *On your turn, you quicken a power. You have used your swift action for this round. *On opponent's turn, you declare you want to use an immediate action. *Since the immediate action counts against next round's 1 swift/round limit, the game now checks to see if you've used NEXT ROUND'S swift action. It doesn't simultaneously check for your last turn's swift actions - if any - because they are irrelevant. *Finding that you have not yet used next turn's swift action, the immediate action goes through. You have now used next turn's swift action, and it will be a while before you can immediate/swift again. It's nonsensical to state that the action comes from next turn's limit, but have it count against this turn's limit. Either it comes from next turn for ALL effects and purposes of the game, or for none of them. Since the text clearly states it does, it also counts towards next turns's limit - not the turn you just finished. Even if you wouldn't agree with this interpretation, consider the errata posted by Mnemonic above which makes it even clearer.
CrimsonDeath 01-07-08, 03:46 AM	I am saying that the text does not allow you to use two in the same round. And you're absolutely wrong about that; the text says nothing of the sort. It says you can't perform more than one Swift action in the same turn. Once your action is over, it's no longer your turn. It's someone else's turn. It's not only not the same turn, but you can't perform swift actions at all because it's not your turn. Now the rules for Immediate actions come into play. Also, even if the text did specify that you can only perform one Swift or Immediate action per round, I question the wisdom of measuring that round starting at the beginning of your turn. Since you can't take Immediate actions while flat-footed, and using an Immediate action during your turn is explicitly mechanically identical to using a Swift action, and using an Immediate action during someone else's turn uses your Swift action for the upcoming turn, wouldn't it make more sense to measure a character's round beginning from the end of his turn instead?
Wizard Random 01-07-08, 07:41 AM	One turn is not "someone else's" turn it is a full circle that needs to come back to you. I'm going to have to go with Dinjin on this one as I believe that is the correct interpretation. Thinking back I don't think I have ever noticed anyone taking more than 1 swift "Equivalent" action until his next turn has come back. That is unless you are a RKV.
InkBlot 01-07-08, 03:43 PM	No, a round is "a full circle that needs to come back to you." Rounds and turns are different things. In a round, everybody takes one turn.
CrimsonDeath 01-07-08, 04:58 PM	One turn is not "someone else's" turn it is a full circle that needs to come back to you. Book and page, please.
m o n k 01-07-08, 07:07 PM	split ray's cheaper IIRC, but how about this one: Personally, I'd suggest : Empower + Meta-psionic mastery(Empower -> Energy missiles)) = +50% damage to up to 5 targets for free (or as I prefer, max pp/d6 augmentation). Where do I find "Meta-psionic mastery"?
InkBlot 01-07-08, 07:39 PM	He probably means Metapower, from Complete Psionic. When you take the feat, you choose one power you know and one metapsi feat you know. From then on, that metapsi costs 2pp less when used with that power. Since Empower Power only costs 2pp to begin with, you can use Metapower to reduce the cost to 0. Split Psionic Ray isn't about doing lots of damage or saving actions. It's about making ray specialists not entirely suck because they can only hit one target at a time. A ray specialist might take Metapower (Split Psionic Ray + favorite ray power) if he has the feat to spare.
m o n k 01-07-08, 08:12 PM	Thanks, InkBlot!
m o n k 01-07-08, 10:42 PM	split ray's cheaper IIRC, but how about this one: Personally, I'd suggest : Empower + Meta-psionic mastery(Empower -> Energy missiles)) = +50% damage to up to 5 targets for free (or as I prefer, max pp/d6 augmentation). Okay, that is cool. But I'm more inclined to combine Metapower with Maximize power. I like the reliability of maximizing damage, and IMO it serves a psion better in the long run. As I worked it out (and I could be way off, as my math skills are crappy), Metapower + Empower (Energy Missle) versus Metapower + Maximize (Energy Missle) goes like this: 5 pp Meta + Empower avg damage = 31.5 Meta + Empower max damage = 54 Meta + Empower min damage = 9 Meta + Maximize does 24 every time. 10 pp Meta + Empower avg damage = 57.5 Meta + Empower max damage = 99 Meta + Empower min damage = 16 Meta + Maximize does 54 every time. 15 pp Meta + Empower avg damage = 84 Meta + Empower max damage = 144 Meta + Empower min damage = 24 Meta + Maximize does 84 every time. 20 pp Meta + Empower avg damage = 110 Meta + Empower max damage = 189 Meta + Empower min damage = 31 Meta + Maximize does 114 every time. As good as the max damage for Meta + Empower is, the minimum damage just starts to look unappealing to me, especially at higher levels. Finally, I love that Meta + Maximize can prevent overusing your pp. You always know how much damage you're going to do. All you have to do is figure out how much damage you need to do, and use exactly the right amount of pp! No more overkill.
DracoPhoenix 01-08-08, 01:58 AM	Okay, that is cool. But I'm more inclined to combine Metapower with Maximize power. I like the reliability of maximizing damage, and IMO it serves a psion better in the long run. As I worked it out (and I could be way off, as my math skills are crappy), Metapower + Empower (Energy Missle) versus Metapower + Maximize (Energy Missle) goes like this: 5 pp Meta + Empower avg damage = 31.5 Meta + Empower max damage = 54 Meta + Empower min damage = 9 Meta + Maximize does 24 every time. 10 pp Meta + Empower avg damage = 57.5 Meta + Empower max damage = 99 Meta + Empower min damage = 16 Meta + Maximize does 54 every time. 15 pp Meta + Empower avg damage = 84 Meta + Empower max damage = 144 Meta + Empower min damage = 24 Meta + Maximize does 84 every time. 20 pp Meta + Empower avg damage = 110 Meta + Empower max damage = 189 Meta + Empower min damage = 31 Meta + Maximize does 114 every time. As good as the max damage for Meta + Empower is, the minimum damage just starts to look unappealing to me, especially at higher levels. Finally, I love that Meta + Maximize can prevent overusing your pp. You always know how much damage you're going to do. All you have to do is figure out how much damage you need to do, and use exactly the right amount of pp! No more overkill. I agree that doing only as much damage as is needed is preferable. Unfortunately, we tend to play games where we don't always know how many exact hit points are needed to kill something - and I'm not familiar enough with the Monster Manuals etc to metagame. So a max' approach is no different to an empowered one for us. Also, your maths is out to the point of mis-informing. Metapower gives -2pp to the cost of meta aug'ing a power. This means you can get empower effectively for free, but max' still has a cost on it (+2pp net). At 20pp, there's only 3dmg difference in the average of empower to max'. There's a possible +66% if empower gets it's maximum (ok, v. unlikely) to max's flat line. That said, max' is quicker to calculate - you can do a simple pp = dmg table :) Sorry, but I noticed a possible muck up in your maths: It looks like you didn't take into account meta power only gives a -2pp to the cost. My Maths: (inc' aug costs, not inc' +/- energy mods, assuming ave dmg of 3.5/die (whole no. only)) 5pp: Empowerd (7dice): 7min/42max/24ave Max (3 dice): 18 10pp: Empowerd (15dice): 15min/90max/52ave Max (8dice) : 48 15pp Empowerd (22dice): 22min/132max/77ave Max (13dice): 78 20pp Empowerd (30dice): 30min/180max/105ave Max (18dice): 108
Fafnir 01-08-08, 05:57 AM	Also, points spent into metapsionics are points not spent to raise the DCs. In the previous example, the empowered powers more difficult to save against.
m o n k 01-08-08, 07:08 PM	DracoPhoenix, I was pretty sure I might get something wrong in my calculations, and I see some of the calculation errors now, but I need some more explanation of one thing. You posted that by using Metapower and Empower Power with Energy Missle, 5pp will let you do 7d6 dmg. I still come up with only 6d6. Here's a peek inside my head: EM costs 2pp for 3d6. EM + Empower costs 4pp for 3d6. EM + Empower + Metapower costs 2pp for 3d6. <--and +50% on the damage rolled, of course! Going on that, I figured the following: EM + Empower + Metapower for 3pp gives 4d6 EM + Empower + Metapower for 4pp gives 5d6 EM + Empower + Metapower for 5pp gives 6d6 I don't understand how your version gives 7d6 for 5pp. And I also figured that EM + Maximize + Metapower would do 4d6 for 5pp. You have it at 3d6 for 5pp.
DracoPhoenix 01-09-08, 01:49 AM	DracoPhoenix, I was pretty sure I might get something wrong in my calculations, and I see some of the calculation errors now, but I need some more explanation of one thing. You posted that by using Metapower and Empower Power with Energy Missle, 5pp will let you do 7d6 dmg. I still come up with only 6d6. Here's a peek inside my head: EM costs 2pp for 3d6. EM + Empower costs 4pp for 3d6. EM + Empower + Metapower costs 2pp for 3d6. <--and +50% on the damage rolled, of course! Going on that, I figured the following: EM + Empower + Metapower for 3pp gives 4d6 EM + Empower + Metapower for 4pp gives 5d6 EM + Empower + Metapower for 5pp gives 6d6 I don't understand how your version gives 7d6 for 5pp. And I also figured that EM + Maximize + Metapower would do 4d6 for 5pp. You have it at 3d6 for 5pp. MP(Emp) costs +0pp to aug so 5pp+0pp = 5pp 5 / 2 = 2.5. Round down = 2. 5+2=7d6 Also, it's a L2 power, so minimum 3pp spend (getting you 4d6). As for max' : 5pp-2pp (4pp(original) - 2pp (MP discount) aug cost of max') = 3d6. Just thought, would also be of use for mend wounds - doing only 3/4's that of heal. (Ok. It means MW doesn't suck as bad)
InkBlot 01-09-08, 12:50 PM	Mend Wounds doesn't have any random variables. You can't apply Empower to it. Also, with Empower you're supposed to roll the damage first then multiply the result by 1.5 to get the total damage you deal. So when you spend 5pp on a metapower empowered energy ray (fire), you roll 5d6, get maybe 16 on the dice, multiply 16 by 1.5 to get 24, and add +5 (+1 damage per die), for a total of 30 fire damage to one enemy.
CrimsonDeath 01-09-08, 01:34 PM	Does Empower Power multiply the damage before or after adding the bonus for the fact that it's fire damage? Also, where you get the +6 in your example, InkBlot?
m o n k 01-09-08, 05:14 PM	MP(Emp) costs +0pp to aug so 5pp+0pp = 5pp 5 / 2 = 2.5. Round down = 2. 5+2=7d6 Also, it's a L2 power, so minimum 3pp spend (getting you 4d6). As for max' : 5pp-2pp (4pp(original) - 2pp (MP discount) aug cost of max') = 3d6. Just thought, would also be of use for mend wounds - doing only 3/4's that of heal. (Ok. It means MW doesn't suck as bad) Okay, I just realized that I was wrong about the base pp cost for Energy Missle. So my post directly above is wrong. DracoPhoenix, you're increasing the d6 by 50%. I never thought about doing it like that, but I do think there's a slight difference in the damage outcomes when you increase the dice by 50% versus increasing the damage rolled by 50%. I'll let someone else figure that one out, though, as my math credibility is less than stellar :(
InkBlot 01-10-08, 10:59 AM	Does Empower Power multiply the damage before or after adding the bonus for the fact that it's fire damage? Also, where you get the +6 in your example, InkBlot? The +6 came from my finger hitting the wrong key. It should be +5. It's a five-die fire-type energy missile, so it does +1 point of damage per die. The bonus from the power dealing fire damage shouldn't be multiplied, because you don't have to roll it. It always deals an extra +5 points of fire damage if you spend 5 power points. Metamagic Empower implies that a static bonus should also be multiplied (it gives an example of casting magic missile, rolling 1d4+1, and then multiplying by 1.5), but that's a separate feat and there's no mandate for parity between metamagic and metapsionic feats. The D&D FAQ did not have an entry on Empower Power, and the FAQ is stupid anyway. I don't believe the +1 per die should be multiplied, but I suppose that it's a debatable issue.
Suspect_Unusual 01-10-08, 11:40 AM	The +6 came from my finger hitting the wrong key. It should be +5. It's a five-die fire-type energy missile, so it does +1 point of damage per die. The bonus from the power dealing fire damage shouldn't be multiplied, because you don't have to roll it. It always deals an extra +5 points of fire damage if you spend 5 power points. Metamagic Empower implies that a static bonus should also be multiplied (it gives an example of casting magic missile, rolling 1d4+1, and then multiplying by 1.5), but that's a separate feat and there's no mandate for parity between metamagic and metapsionic feats. The D&D FAQ did not have an entry on Empower Power, and the FAQ is stupid anyway. I don't believe the +1 per die should be multiplied, but I suppose that it's a debatable issue. Empower Spell wording: All variable, numeric effects of an empowered spell are increased by one-half. Empower Power wording: All variable, numeric effects of an empowered power are increased by one-half. An empowered power deals half again as much damage as normal, cures half again as many hit points, affects half again as many targets, and so forth, as appropriate. The clarification seems more inclined towards increasing all damage done by the spell by 1/2, if anything...
InkBlot 01-10-08, 12:48 PM	If you look at the PHB instead of the SRD, you'll see the example with magic missile too. I'm not going to argue for one way or the other. There's support for both. It was Monk who wanted to know the worth of empower. So I suppose he should get to decide how to interpret the feat for the purpose of that discussion.
AntiDjinn 01-10-08, 02:22 PM	It appears to matter whether or not the added damage is bonus damage, or just an adjustment of the variable range. A single Magic Missile does 1d4+1, in real world mathematics that is a variable (with values ranging from 1 to 4) plus a constant (always 1). In D&D, however, it is read as a single variable with values ranging from 2 to 5. The added +1 to the damage range for making certain choices with some of the energy powers is not explicitly called bonus damage, but it is called an additional +1 per dice and is added to the normal damage.