Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 KoboldAvenger Jul 10, 2010 11:57:16	To my knowledge Psionic Power is getting less coverage than Martial Power 2 got.  Yeah, I know the book seems to be right in the middle of a bunch of releases such as Dark Sun at the same time, and the Essentials happening after it... Beyond those two powers, and a quick mention of the Alienist Paragon Path, we haven't been given much about what's in it.  I assume the new builds are going to be similar to the builds we've been getting before, and nothing like the essentials classes, because that book happened just too early in the release schedule.
#2 Marandahir Jul 10, 2010 12:10:34	It's likely any new Psionic Classes in future books will use some sort of hybrid of PP-subsystem and the Essentials revised system.  However, old Psionic classes will likely just get an errata update that brings them more into balance with the revised system, rather than joining the revised formula. New builds are attached to the old classes, not to subclasses, so Psionic Power will definitely use the original class system, but almost certainly recieved last minute material to bring the new builds in line with any errata being done to Psionics alongside everything else that's fixed by the time of Essentials the month after. While it's too soon of a book to use the Essentials model (it's already gone to the printers by now, certainly), it definitely wasn't too soon to errata it in the same way other old classes are being errata'd to balance with the the revised model.
#3 celticmutt Jul 10, 2010 13:28:43	Considering that WotC considers the power point system a success, and other stuff said in that last article, I'm betting Psionics won't get chnaged much at all.
#4 KoboldAvenger Jul 10, 2010 13:49:36	I think power points would probably remain the same, it's the concept that builds become more like subclasses that are more distinct from each other that might be a revision coming to psionic classes in the future.  Of course it might be reserved for Players Option: Heroes of the Mind (or will it be Psyche?).
#5 Haldrik Jul 10, 2010 14:43:51	I loved 3e power points, but they had limitations due to the need to stay comparable with the 3e Advancement Table that only used Vancian-style Daily powers. Now the 4e Advancement Table with Atwills and Encounters, is much better at conveying spontaneity than 3e ever could be. For various reasons, I feel, the Psionic classes should have used the normal 4e Advancement Table without inheriting the power points. The purpose of the 3e power points was to achieve spontaneity and to eliminate Vancian Daily powers. It surprises me when 4e eliminated the reasonably spontaneous Encounter powers and imposed the Vancian Daily powers. It seems to contradict the goal of power points. I would mind 4e power points less if the classes kept the Encounter powers, and instead converted the Daily powers into points. Using Daily points to occasionally make the Psionic Atwill power flare into a Daily 'nova', is reminiscent of 3e power points anyway.
#6 Haldrik Jul 10, 2010 14:44:08	The status of Psionic power as part of the core D&D tradition has always been in question because its fringe mechanics discouraged players from using it at the table. So, to secure Psionic as part of 'core', it needs to use whatever system is normal. Now that there is a distinction between 'Essentials' and 'Option', there needs to be at least one Psionic class in the Essentials line to sustain the status of Psionic as an 'essential' part of the D&D tradition.
#7 Shroomy Jul 10, 2010 18:19:32	My guess is that we'll get at least 4 PP excerpts beginning Monday, August 2nd (two Mondays and two Fridays prior to release on 8-17 corresponds to the four psionic classes; tack on some of the other content, such as feats, bloodlines, and magic items and you're good to go) and probably a large part of the "In the Works" preview will address Psionic Power.
#8 Marandahir Jul 10, 2010 19:26:23	Except that it isn't Essentials VS Options.  The game moving forward isn't Essentials.  The game moving forward is 4th Revised Edition.  Essentials refers to 10 products, and ONLY those 10 products. Psionics doesn't need to be revised into the new format to go under the name Essentials, because future classes won't be under that name either.  Everything, including old classes that have been errata'd, will be part of 4th Revised.  I expect less support for Str-Clerics, Chaladins, Str-Rangers, and Conlocks, however, as a result, and more riders based off newer builds than older builds.  Still, major class revision to the new model isn't necessary for them to remain in 4th Revised.  Especially when WotC said that Psionics were more inline with this new design model.
#9 Haldrik Jul 10, 2010 19:50:13	As you say, there are some things we disagree about. I know, you believe it when the designers said, 'everything is core'. Youv been wrong about that kind of thing just recently, being 'fooled' by the marketing doublespeak about Essentials. I dont believe the designers. (Understand, I like the designers.) They never committed the 'everything is core' principle to the Rules As Written. The only reference is an obscure Dragon article. They continued a policy of doublespeak for the sake of marketing, to convince players who want something, 'it is core', and to convince players who dont want this same something, 'it isnt core'. Essentials looks and feels like a 180-degree rejection of the 'everything is core' philosophy. As of now, 'Essentials' is the new 'core'. They didnt call it 'Intro'. They called it, 'Essential', the necessary part of D&D, the essence of D&D, the core. They didnt call the rest, 'Expansion'. They called it, 'Option'. Anything that isnt Essential is nonessential. You dont need it. Its an option. They said it. They meant what they said. I feel you arent opening your eyes: Not everything is core. Because now the designers say, most of it is nonessential.
#10 Marandahir Jul 10, 2010 20:18:01	That's never been the name origin for Essentials that they told us.  They said from the beginning that Essentials refers to "reducing the classes and races and rules and options down to their essentials." I choose to believe in WotC.  I choose to believe in what we know, rather than make baseless speculation because WotC isn't trustworthy.  I like the designers, and I understand you like the designers as well.  But I prefer to work with what we know rather than speculate on what might happen.
#11 Haldrik Jul 10, 2010 20:47:12	Please, read that again. "Reducing the classes and races and rules and options down to their essentials." It means, stripping away everything that isnt core.
#12 Marandahir Jul 10, 2010 20:55:27	I paraphrased.  And I don't see that as "stripping away core" whatsoever.  Mike Mearls himself said in a response to one of these overblown threads that the old material would still be supported, and Bill Slavicsek said you'd be playing them side-by-side. I'm just saying what's been told to us.  And when I said "reducing to their essentials" I meant, finding what's essential about the class, what can be trimmed to make it simpler as an easy way into the game, and removing the headaches that are stuff like V-classes, the problems with Predator Druids, Martial Dailies, etc.  And I was referring to earmarking classes, not stripping away classes we've not marked for scrutinating.  Sure, strip away what's junk, like Str-Clerics.  It doesn't mean strip away Bards or Psions.
#13 Haldrik Jul 10, 2010 21:05:34	3e 'supported' lots of stuff that wasnt core. Some would say, Psionic, for example.
#14 Marandahir Jul 12, 2010 1:14:55	No, they didn't.  Not in the way 4E does.  Psionic was ONLY supported in books that catered to Psionics.  Otherwise, it was ignored.  The problem was that none of the books saw them as an expansion to anything but the Player's Handbook, unless it was a specific support book like Complete Psionic.  Player's Handbook 2 was unique in that it talked about a handful of Complete classes.  Again, however, it ignored things like Psionics and Magic of Incarnum, and wasn't coordinated with the same-year launch Tome of Magic.  Nothing about 3.5E was organised.  No set of classes was using the core, standardised same system.  Few books acknowledge other books existances, outside of the Core 3 and maybe one or two other books it was made as a specific expansion to or as part of series with. This is entirely different.  4E is a very organic model, that has taken tiny references early on and turned them into new lore, exploring them in new ways, expanding out into new volumes.  Everything checks out, and when it doesn't (like Bane's origin), either it's written off as conflicting lore, or something is later made to reconcile it (Goblins changed the story to fit with their societal values).  And even those are lore material, not crunch.  Classes and races that appear in one place are supported elsewhere.  Dark Pact got support in Arcane Power.  Warforged got feats in various books.  This is an organic, eco-system model of bookwriting, where you use EVERY book that has come before to build your new book.  You still use the 3 original rulebooks the most for standard rules, of course, as Mike Mearls said.  The organic model is why everything is core, and nothing is core.  Essentials won't overwrite anything, because everything is too tied in with the nature of 4E.  This is just like a form of errata plus new builds that are trying new directions in class formation rather than just in class feature choice and power choice.
#15 Duke5150 Jul 12, 2010 4:12:48	In regards to 4e fluff, not everything checks out, plenty of contradictions and inconsistencies and just plain different fluff about the same thing.(see tharizdun and dark ones for good examples)  In regards to 4e mechanics, there is a reason we have constant errata and rules updates. There is a reason they're releasing a revised edition. Not everything checks out. And what happens when/if essentials/future products come out and do exactly what some folks are worried about? Make it difficult to use prior material with newer material... Then the defenders will come out and talk about how the new changes are worth it because they're better and the problem will be steamrolled along with fans of the original 4e. As is happening right now. It's as it's always been on this forum. No change, so no surprise. Lucky for me, I have more hope than dread.
#16 celticmutt Jul 12, 2010 5:16:06	There is a reason they're releasing a revised edition. Except that they're not.
#17 GhostStepper Jul 12, 2010 12:02:35	The purpose of the 3e power points was to achieve spontaneity and to eliminate Vancian Daily powers. It surprises me when 4e eliminated the reasonably spontaneous Encounter powers and imposed the Vancian Daily powers. It seems to contradict the goal of power points. I would mind 4e power points less if the classes kept the Encounter powers, and instead converted the Daily powers into points. Using Daily points to occasionally make the Psionic Atwill power flare into a Daily 'nova', is reminiscent of 3e power points anyway. Er...4e psionic classes didn't replace encoutner powers with daily powers. Power points are an encounter-based resource that recharge at a short rest. In fact, they do exactly what you're asking them to do: grant more flexibility. Every encouter you can choose to spam the same "encounter" effect mulitple times or use your PP to activate multiple encounter-stytle effects. Psionic classes still get more flexibility than other classes. And what happens when/if essentials/future products come out and do exactly what some folks are worried about? Make it difficult to use prior material with newer material... Has there been even the most minute evidence that this is the case? From the cleric preview, it looks like the essentials line are just putting out new class builds with some more class features added at higher levels. They use the same feats and powers as everything else in the game. How does this even remotely hint that future products will be any harder to use with prior material thanm, say, Martial Power 2 and the PHB or PHB2 and the PHB?
#18 Duke5150 Jul 12, 2010 12:38:36	Which is why thatis a question and not a statement. I don't know what essentials will do. I originally thought it was going to be an alternate way to play the game, but from what I'v been hearing, it's going to become the new standard. Whether or not it's a revised edition, we have to wait and see. Although, 4e IS already a revised edition by the very definition of the word and amazon seems to support that conclusion by calling it a revised edition. Like I keep saying, if future products support the PHB1 material, and I can use everything I purchased without problem with future products, I have no problem with essentials at all. I can skip them as I planned. But when I hear that Player Option books (essential specific?) will  be taking the place of PHB2, it makes me wonder. When people claim the PHB1 will become out of print (?) it leads me to believe pre-revision material will no longer be supported.
#19 Haldrik Jul 12, 2010 12:45:53	Duke: There is a reason they're releasing a revised edition. Celtic: Except that they're not. Haldrik: Except apparently WotC calls it a 'revised edition'. At least it seems that way. The Amazon.com lists the future WotC products as '4th edition' 'revised edition'. Even so, the Amazon information requires further clarification because of notable inconsistencies. Also, the wording is actually '4th revised edition edition', which includes some kind of editing typo. Still, the existence of word 'revised' in this context is highly signficant, and seems to corroborate those who prefer to describe Essentials as a revised edition of 4e. If WotC themselves call it a 'revised edition', then those who say it isnt 'revised' are incorrect.
#20 Haldrik Jul 12, 2010 12:57:07	Haldrik: I would mind 4e power points less if the classes kept the Encounter powers, and instead converted the Daily powers into points. Ghost: 4e psionic classes didn't replace encoutner powers with daily powers. Haldrik: You may have misread what I said. Of course, they didnt replace Encounter powers with Daily powers. I said they didnt keep the Encounter powers. They replaced the Encounter powers with power points. I would have been happier if they replaced the Daily powers with power points. That way, the class could keep the spontaneous Encounter powers as it, and after converting Daily powers into spontaneous power points, there would be no more Vancian Daily preparation. Still, for spontaneous mages, Id rather have neither Dailies nor Power Points. Just Atwills and Encounters, apparently like the Essential Fighter subclasses may use. Ghost Stepper: In fact, they do exactly what you're asking them to do: grant more flexibility. Every encouter you can choose to spam the same "encounter" effect mulitple times or use your PP to activate multiple encounter-stytle effects. Haldrik: The Encounter powers dont need more flexibility. They are already great. The Daily powers are the ones that need flexibility. For spontaneous mages, the Vancian Daily powers are the problem.
#21 Haldrik Jul 12, 2010 13:09:20	Marandahir: No, [the 3e designers] didn't [support Psionic]. Not in the way 4E does.  Psionic was ONLY supported in books that catered to Psionics. Otherwise, it was ignored.    It is a good point, but not conclusive. I agree, 3e did 'contain' Psionic, away from the rest of D&D. However 3e did include Psionic in the SRD - no small thing! Moreover, 4e itself also 'contains' Psionic away from the rest of D&D. By accident or design, the Players Handbook 3 contains ALL Psionic capabilities, and the new Essentials line keeps Psionic away from the rest of D&D.
#22 Marandahir Jul 12, 2010 16:42:57	Except that Psionic Power is coming out next month, and will be another book with PP-based classes. And Essentials isn't keeping Psionics out.  That's your speculation that certain classes are going to be updated to a new model, and other classes are going to lose all support for them, which I don't believe. Also, take a look at Dark Sun Campaign Guide.  Note that it's listed in Amazon.com as "4th Revised edition edition" as well.  Then think for a minute.  We've seen previews of Dark Sun Arena Fighters using encounter powers and dailies, and built exactly like a normal fighter only using whatever class features tie with the Arena Fighter build in Dark Sun. And yet it uses the Revised Edition name on Amazon, which is also repeats edition and both are in lowercase, which is more suspect.  Psionic Power isn't under the Revised logo though, but they come out the same day. Amazon needs to check their sources again if we are to go by your suspicions that everything "Fighter" in the Revised Edition is based on the Essentials Fighter.  And if they do need to check their sources, I would cast this whol Revised Edition nonsense in even more of a suspect light than I already am.
#23 Haldrik Jul 12, 2010 17:40:46	Marandahir: 'Psionic Power is coming out next month.'    Unfortunately, the 4e book Psionic Power is comparable to the 3e book Complete Psionic. Thus 4e splits off the Psionic power source in the same way 3e did. 'Essentials isn't keeping Psionics out.'    The way I see it, the non-invitation to the Essentials line up, defacto, makes Psionic non-essential. 'That's your speculation that certain classes are going to be updated to a new model, and other classes are going to lose all support for them, which I don't believe.'    I feel 'support' isnt the same thing as 'core' or 'essential'. The Shadow power source will certainly enjoy 'support' because many appreciate the darker edginess of the horror genre. But, it too seems to be a non-essential part of D&D. 'Take a look at the Dark Sun Campaign Guide. It's listed in Amazon.com as "4th Revised edition edition" as well. We've seen previews of Dark Sun Arena Fighters, using encounter powers and dailies. And yet it uses the Revised Edition name on Amazon'    Here is where we may agree more. The 'revision' mainly concerns class design. No doubt the designers working on Dark Sun and those working on Essentials inspired eachother. Probably, we will see the Dark Sun 'theme' mechanic for future subclasses. Perhaps Dark Sun will also include certain Essential-esque 'subclasses', that havent been revealed yet? IIRC, Slavicseks Essentials article mentioned, the subclass design helped tailor certain subclasses for certain campaign settings. In any case, noting the Dark Sun Fighter previews as 'revised', confirms the current classes will remain truly compatable. 'Psionic Power isn't under the Revised logo though, but they come out the same day.'    Yeah, I dont read too much into this. ( ;) Tho perhaps I should, if it suggests just how isolated Psionic will be from the 'future' of D&D.) 'Amazon needs to check their sources again.'    Seriously.
#24 MusicOfCreation Jul 12, 2010 17:56:23	I'd like to think that essentials is easy mode tutorial level D&D and it wouldn't necessarily be a good thing to be in it. I mean would you rather people consider your class/power source easy mode (like archery ranger easy mode) or would you rather be able to say it takes skill and thus has too many nuances for new players to grasp?
#25 Haldrik Jul 12, 2010 18:01:40	If I understand correctly, the Essentials line will include both simple classes and complex classes, so players can find something appropriate for their own level of mastery. Presumably, the Fighter is simpler, the Wizard is more complex, and perhaps the Warpriest is somewhere in between. If so, the Essentials series can handle a reasonable amount of complexity. Come to think of it, the designers may have returned to the original design of making the Warlock a 'simpler' mage.
#26 calronmoonflower Jul 14, 2010 2:00:10	No, they didn't.  Not in the way 4E does.  Psionic was ONLY supported in books that catered to Psionics.  This existed in most 3E books, because splat book only expanded core books, unless it specifically focused on something else. Later books dropped this and had more psionics because of it.