-Stay out of the way and fumble with your crossbow, hoping to hit something for a d8.
-Zap with your wand of magic missile or dorje of crystal shard.
-Sit around feeling self-important, watching the battle go by.
-Dominate some tough dumb brute and have it kill stuff for you throughout the day. (this will be an option for me in a few more levels).
one random question: What happens if a psicrystal dies? A familiar dying is bad news, but I could not find anything about the psicrystal.
Thanks!
I found nothing in the SRD relating to destroyed psicrystals, though I heard they reappear in 24 hours.
A caster can select reserve feats. For example acidic splatter (Complete Mage) gives you an at-will ranged touch attack that deals a number of d6 of acid damage equal to the level of the highest level acid spell you can cast.
If you give up a single level of casting, you can use arcane trickster (Dungeon Master's Guide), spellwarp sniper (Complete Scoundrel), or unseen seer (Complete Mage) to advance sneak attack along with casting. Ultimately, you'd have 9d6 base damage plus 8d6 sneak attack damage as an at-will touch attack.
If you have at least 1 power point, possibly through race or a feat, you can use greater psionic shot to deal an extra 4d6 damage. This consumes at least 4 feats though.
one random question: What happens if a psicrystal dies? A familiar dying is bad news, but I could not find anything about the psicrystal.
Q: What happens when my psicrystal dies?
A: The official response from Customer Service is "You can get another one." That is all that is written on the subject, as it wasn't addressed in Complete Psionics. Come up with a suitable houserule -- personally, I've tried a few different ones, but from now on will be using the simplest, inspired by the Tome of Magic: It reforms on its own after 24 hours. I must stress, though, this is a house rule -- no official method of getting a psicrystal back exists (though it's clear you do get another one), and no penalty exists when it dies (beyond not having your crystal around).
Source: community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...
I wish psions had reserve feats because that is the type of fix I'm looking for. Great resource, necro. I will bookmark it and look it over.
There are only 2 that are considered powerful IMO. The elemental summoning (because you can ask the elemental to hold you and move) and the fiery burst (due to the range/area and targetting type)
Since we are talking about blasting, the fiery burst is the one we should look at. The feat is very good at levels 3-4, good at 5-8, ok at levels 9-10 and weak at levels 11+ (and increasingly weaker). The entire problem lies with the expotential power of spell levels and the need to hold a spell of the highest level for best damage.
Factor in the need to remove opponents as quickly as possible for best effcieny/effect for the game system (and the low damage of fiery burst/area effect), up against cone of cold, its gets meh. Up against chain lightning, its a faceplam feat.
If your DM does not allow retraining of feats and your group is not the extremely slow leveling/low-mid level campaign type (eg some groups run from 1-9 in a few RL years), its balanced ok
-Dominate some tough dumb brute and have it kill stuff for you throughout the day. (this will be an option for me in a few more levels).
This is the one I went with for my arcane caster-- charm, charm monster, dominate. Word of warning though, it gets addictive-- my character ended up going from neutral good to neutral evil in the course of like three levels because I was running monsters around the battle field like little chess pieces.
My favorite quote from that campaign was when the DM asked what alignment I was and I responded, "Neutral... just neutral," and proceeded to erase the G off of my character sheet. He didn't bother asking when the E got added. ;)
That campaign was fun because in addition to being a mind-bending wizard, one of the other players was an elemental rebuking cleric. The battles got ridiculously large and overpowered (particularly when we started pulling in creatures with planar binding) and walking a rebuked, retching red dragon disguised as a gold through Silverymoon to use a teleportation circle ("he ate a bad goat, really")... good times.
Lol on the alignment change. I have a penchant for mind-controlling roleplay characters in general and have had alignment creeping issues in the past as well! My group won't let me live down the times I resorted to controlling party members.
To be slightly less useless: the reserve feats are basically the 3.5 version of at-wills, from what I can tell. There's maybe two things I prefer in 4e over 3.5, and the availability of those at-wills is one of them. The other is the skill system, because assigning singular points every level between 10-20 skills is a major pain.
That way you will be using your full arsenal in your every battle and you won't be stuck with the same choices over and over (like the at will powers in fourth edition).
A way to achieve this is:α)Bestow Power (XPS): This power unaughmented gives 2pp for 3
β)Linked Power (CPS): This is used to link two bestow power powers making the second the metapsionic cost of the first.
γ)2*Metapower (bestow power) (CPS): This feat reduces the metapsionic cost of a power by 2 every time taken with a minimum of zero.
So if you are following me the first bestow power costs 3 and gives 2 and the second costs zero and gives 2 for a total profit of one pp every 6 seconds beyond the first round.
First and foremost, if you are a psionicist get a combo that confers pp regeneration.
That way you will be using your full arsenal in your every battle and you won't be stuck with the same choices over and over (like the at will powers in fourth edition).
A way to achieve this is:α)Bestow Power (XPS): This power unaughmented gives 2pp for 3
β)Linked Power (CPS): This is used to link two bestow power powers making the second the metapsionic cost of the first.
γ)2*Metapower (bestow power) (CPS): This feat reduces the metapsionic cost of a power by 2 every time taken with a minimum of zero.
So if you are following me the first bestow power costs 3 and gives 2 and the second costs zero and gives 2 for a total profit of one pp every 6 seconds beyond the first round.
I'd guess that most DMs wouldn't allow any version of a recharge setup.
The fact is that it can be done and is worth a try.
If trying to pull off your trick, i hope the OP is open and upfront on what is being done. 3.5 gets a lot of hate from DMs because many immature players pull tricks without discussion with the DM
I only mentioned that systemwise it is what he is looking for and he should try to see if he is allowed to do it.For if yes,his problem is solved.
Aside from that,you happen to think that a player is immature if he makes his strategy without asking the DM first?
Then every time you fling a fireball in the air over your web spells you should have first discussed it with your DM.(If you are willing to do it, do it but don't force your opinion of "proper gaming" on others).
I find more immature the reaction of a DM being mad about a trick one of the PCs pulls legaly.After all he chose to play with those rules in the first place and wouldn't change them in order to save the players or impair one of his villains,at least he shouldn't (as he shouldn't change the rules in the middle of any game,like chess) except if they had changed it from the start and all agreed to play with the houserules.
As for the 3.x edition haters they can always seek for balance refuge at 4th edition.
But that means the prefer something different than what DnD represented until 2008.
I won't tread on the discussion of if this is good or bad ,I will just say that the are beyond my interests in the same way some guys playing baseball would be.
Then every time you fling a fireball in the air over your web spells you should have first discussed it with your DM.(If you are willing to do it, do it but don't force your opinion of "proper gaming" on others).
I find more immature the reaction of a DM being mad about a trick one of the PCs pulls legaly.After all he chose to play with those rules in the first place and wouldn't change them in order to save the players or impair one of his villains,at least he shouldn't (as he shouldn't change the rules in the middle of any game,like chess) except if they had changed it from the start and all agreed to play with the houserules.
Exactly just like DMs should allow Pun Puns into any game where he is buildable with the books allowed. Too bad if the DM never read what is Pun Pun and was not expecting a high powered character amongst a bunch of normal powered characters. He needs to get schooled by the player who copies the idea from the internet and its a valid tactic anyway
Anything a player can do, the DM can use the exact same method against said player except with an endless supply but any game that devolves into this situation is just asking for trouble. This is the reason why 3.5 turns off some DMs and as a player of 3.5, i always support early prevention of situations that can lead to such an end.
Aside from that,you happen to think that a player is immature if he makes his strategy without asking the DM first?
Then every time you fling a fireball in the air over your web spells you should have first discussed it with your DM.(If you are willing to do it, do it but don't force your opinion of "proper gaming" on others).
I find more immature the reaction of a DM being mad about a trick one of the PCs pulls legaly.After all he chose to play with those rules in the first place and wouldn't change them in order to save the players or impair one of his villains,at least he shouldn't (as he shouldn't change the rules in the middle of any game,like chess) except if they had changed it from the start and all agreed to play with the houserules.
As for the 3.x edition haters they can always seek for balance refuge at 4th edition.
But that means the prefer something different than what DnD represented until 2008.
I won't tread on the discussion of if this is good or bad ,I will just say that the are beyond my interests in the same way some guys playing baseball would be.
This is just a load of horse manure. There is a big difference between "following the rules", and intentionally using loopholes in them to bypass the major limitation of classes that are already tier 1 or 2.
Also, many people play under the "gentelman's agreement" which basically boils down to "The DM will play nice if the PCs do, but if they start abusing cheesy crap then the DM feels free to do so himself, and he has more weapons in his arsenal."
I am quite a liberal DM, allowing nearly anything in my games, and I do provide a big list of house rules before those games start which are designed to make them more balanced and fun, but if someone came along with some overpowered combo that I'd never heard of and tried to "sneak it it", I'd have no problem telling them to come back with a different character if I thought it would cause balance issues in the game.
So legal or not, if you're planning on trying something like this, you certainly better talk it over with your DM first.
My favorite trick thus far to conserve PP was with my telepath. I took Unsettling Enchantment feat, re-labelled Unsettling Telepathy, since it says right in the XPH that Telepathy is functionally identical to the Enchantment school, and used it with the Demoralize power. For 1 PP, I had an area attack that didn't target allies and even if they made the save to not become shaken, still suffered -2 to attack and AC for 1 round. It wasn't overpowered, but it was an almost disturbingly efficient use of PP.
About the reserve feats.
There are only 2 that are considered powerful IMO. The elemental summoning (because you can ask the elemental to hold you and move) and the fiery burst (due to the range/area and targetting type)
Since we are talking about blasting, the fiery burst is the one we should look at. The feat is very good at levels 3-4, good at 5-8, ok at levels 9-10 and weak at levels 11+ (and increasingly weaker). The entire problem lies with the expotential power of spell levels and the need to hold a spell of the highest level for best damage.
Factor in the need to remove opponents as quickly as possible for best effcieny/effect for the game system (and the low damage of fiery burst/area effect), up against cone of cold, its gets meh. Up against chain lightning, its a faceplam feat.
If your DM does not allow retraining of feats and your group is not the extremely slow leveling/low-mid level campaign type (eg some groups run from 1-9 in a few RL years), its balanced ok
Not sure if Fiery Burst is unbalanced, though the targetting arangement is very nice to set things on fire with no one knowing you did it. One way it can be broken is at level 1 if you have a human (or flaws for extra feats) to get Precocious Apprentice to ccess a single level 2 spell once/day (pick a fire spell) and Fiery Burst. Now you're doing 2d6 fire, reflex half, all day long. Granted, a greatsword Fighter or Barbarian is still doing more than you. But compared to other damage spells that actually cost a resource to cast, it's stupidly broken. But only for the first 2 levels of gameplay.
I have to say I'm surprised you didn't include Minor Shapechange on that list. It's an unlimited supply of temp hp to refresh every time you lose them from taking damage. You can't likely get it until level 9, granted, but it makes Improved Toughness look like dog crap. I also think Holy Warrior from C.Divine is overpowered, when you compare it to Weapon Specialization. I know, that feat sucks. But Holy Warrior is just SO much better I don't like it. Especially since it benefits Clerics only, who really didn't need the help making fighters feel worthless.
Then every time you fling a fireball in the air over your web spells you should have first discussed it with your DM.(If you are willing to do it, do it but don't force your opinion of "proper gaming" on others).
I find more immature the reaction of a DM being mad about a trick one of the PCs pulls legaly.After all he chose to play with those rules in the first place and wouldn't change them in order to save the players or impair one of his villains,at least he shouldn't (as he shouldn't change the rules in the middle of any game,like chess) except if they had changed it from the start and all agreed to play with the houserules.
Exactly just like DMs should allow Pun Puns into any game where he is buildable with the books allowed. Too bad if the DM never read what is Pun Pun and was not expecting a high powered character amongst a bunch of normal powered characters. He needs to get schooled by the player who copies the idea from the internet and its a valid tactic anyway
Anything a player can do, the DM can use the exact same method against said player except with an endless supply but any game that devolves into this situation is just asking for trouble. This is the reason why 3.5 turns off some DMs and as a player of 3.5, i always support early prevention of situations that can lead to such an end.
For the first paragraph I should mention that a DM in my view (and the way I choose to DM)
should not have a problem with power itself, but with the way it is inserted in the game.
In other words if a player made the pun pun combo and I had nothing in the campaign setting watching for if that happens,then I would let it fly (as long as it wasn't based on metagaming and could be done with the rules I had announced in the begining of the game world).
Secondly no player or DM can be "schooled" by another as long as maturity is present on both sides and a player has taken a character he will do his best to roleplay whether he is strong or weak (as those two situations can change from one moment to the other with nobody in perfect control of them).Remember,you are not enemies,those other creatures on the table are your budies.
As for the strong VS weak characters,take notice that balance is unable to be as long as you play an interesting game.One would like to be a fighter another would like to be a wizard, as long as the wizard can copy the fighter with a simulacrum 10 times (or better,himself 10 times) you can't talk about balance and if it is a little or a lot is purely subjective (I have met with guys that thought of every spellcaster even the adept as overpowered to the point they played campaigns with only warriors for PCs) so the DM has to state his limits at the begining of the campaign in order to inform the players what will fly and what not otherwise no need to even know the rules would be there:why grapple if the moment that matters most the DM dims this action overpowered and bans it? (I have seen it happening).
About the second paragraph I would say that the antagonistic model you are presenting is rather immature.A player like every other character in the setting can be at any situation or possision (including that of an infinitely powerful being) why not letting him do it, and without effort if he finds the way why not, if you happen to think that some of his tricks are things that some NPCs would use (according to the personality you have imagine them with),make them use them to as it would be proper roleplaying from your part.Maybe then one would think to prevent further abuse of the rules of the universe he may suceed he may not but it is all in the program anyway (you didn't create the world to leave it as it is neither to be the only one to confer strong changes over it as an act of will,else you would write a book).As for the other players,they can still adventure the world and notice its changes having or not having any in game connection with the poweful one, just like in a party that has a wizard,a cleric and a fighter and the former two teleport to different locations.
At last the only way to prevent such situations -the antagonistic ones- in an enviroment they could happen is to state the rules beforehand and stick to them as above.
The case of an immature player doesn't get better if the DM acts immature too and bans things outright.That way he would give his word no value.
Aside from that,you happen to think that a player is immature if he makes his strategy without asking the DM first?
Then every time you fling a fireball in the air over your web spells you should have first discussed it with your DM.(If you are willing to do it, do it but don't force your opinion of "proper gaming" on others).
I find more immature the reaction of a DM being mad about a trick one of the PCs pulls legaly.After all he chose to play with those rules in the first place and wouldn't change them in order to save the players or impair one of his villains,at least he shouldn't (as he shouldn't change the rules in the middle of any game,like chess) except if they had changed it from the start and all agreed to play with the houserules.
As for the 3.x edition haters they can always seek for balance refuge at 4th edition.
But that means the prefer something different than what DnD represented until 2008.
I won't tread on the discussion of if this is good or bad ,I will just say that the are beyond my interests in the same way some guys playing baseball would be.
This is just a load of horse manure. There is a big difference between "following the rules", and intentionally using loopholes in them to bypass the major limitation of classes that are already tier 1 or 2.
Also, many people play under the "gentelman's agreement" which basically boils down to "The DM will play nice if the PCs do, but if they start abusing cheesy crap then the DM feels free to do so himself, and he has more weapons in his arsenal."
I am quite a liberal DM, allowing nearly anything in my games, and I do provide a big list of house rules before those games start which are designed to make them more balanced and fun, but if someone came along with some overpowered combo that I'd never heard of and tried to "sneak it it", I'd have no problem telling them to come back with a different character if I thought it would cause balance issues in the game.
So legal or not, if you're planning on trying something like this, you certainly better talk it over with your DM first.
I must admit I completely despise that style of play (the gentle until not so gentlemans agreement) and say that it is full of pretention and ambiguation as one can never completely understand what another deems overpowered.
Just for the mention of it,I don't deem the recharge overpowered and think that it gives opportunity to make things more interesting in a game.
Secondly,a player shouldn't sneak a combo in.Never. He instead should do it oppenly and shouldn't be judged for that.
If one of my friends would toss one of my characters out of his campaign for a reason like this,I would take that particular game far from seriously.
At last balance is a nonexistent situation in the game you are bothered to play with.
Cope with it and have fun with no "agreements under the table".
Just for the mention of it,I don't deem the recharge overpowered and think that it gives opportunity to make things more interesting in a game
You are entitled to your opinions, but many will disagree with this. Recharge is not broken by itself (the psion is still constrained by time) but it's overpowered IMO.
Power is relative, so if in your campaign everyone has access to options of a power level similar to PP recharge then it's fine. Conversely if you are a recharge psion and everybody else is tier 3, wouldn't you say there's a problem? It's not about being absolutely balanced, it's about not bein completely unbalanced.
Secondly,a player shouldn't sneak a combo in.Never. He instead should do it oppenly and shouldn't be judged for that.
That much we can agree on. The whole point of the gentleman's agreement is to be upfront about things - "is it ok if my character can do that?" - at creation/level-up time. That's prevention.
The whole "the DM can do worse to you" is the repression part and it won't ever be used if people follow the above - it only needs to exist to curtail jerks.
play within the guidelines and dont get greedy for Power
i never play using a PP recharge, nor do i allow it when i DM(i rule that Bestow Power simply "transfers" PP from your reserve to anothers reserve in my games.... thus it can cost you a lot of PP to give them to someone else)
I think style of game depends greatly on group dynamics. What everyone is saying here could be true if a given situation exists. I don't see why Bestow Power would work because it mentions "another psionic creature's mind." Psionic reserve feats would be nice, but I'm not going to ask for anything new to be created.
What summarises the whole conversation given above is that there are different opinions about styles of play.
The thing is that in an entirely new environment the only thing that remains static is the rules of the game at hand (one can play football using light weaponry if it is what him and his buddies like to do that doesn't mean that football actually works that way-when I start a new game,if nothing else is mentioned I will assume it is played unarmed).
So, what are you allowed to use of the legally provided powers.Is the pp regeneration allowed? Is it not? What is allowed then have you asked?
There should be some useful tricks even after that.(not to sneak in of course! As I must watch the way I express things in this forum).
As for the bestow power the part you are reading is flavor text. The point is that without that combo the only use in it is actually that-as you would only lose a lot pp by using it on yourself.
But its target is one psionic creature (as you can see under the target entry).
Don't get stack with that,there are other ways to do the same if that makes you feel weird although it is legal.
Just give some guideline on what you are searching for (that is the illegal limitations you are entitled to) and for gods sake don't ever again mention the reserve feats as a way of combat.
In other words if a player made the pun pun combo and I had nothing in the campaign setting watching for if that happens,then I would let it fly
Then you fail as a DM. It is not fun when one character is infinitely more powerful than the others at the table, because from then on the others basically can't contribute in a meaningful way. And in a game as complex as D&D, you can never think of every possibly broken combo. There hasn't been a 3.5 book published in years now, but people are still finding crazy, overlooked combinations of things. That's one of the reasons why these forums (and others like them) are still frequented.
1) Just because something is technically legal doesn't mean it should be allowed in a game.
2) Achieving perfect balance is not possible. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to maintain some semblance of it in our games, though.
If you don't comprehend those basic things, then I have a hard time believing that you've ever DMed any game more than a 1-shot. I also question your maturity as a person.
In other words if a player made the pun pun combo and I had nothing in the campaign setting watching for if that happens,then I would let it fly
Then you fail as a DM. It is not fun when one character is infinitely more powerful than the others at the table, because from then on the others basically can't contribute in a meaningful way. And in a game as complex as D&D, you can never think of every possibly broken combo. There hasn't been a 3.5 book published in years now, but people are still finding crazy, overlooked combinations of things. That's one of the reasons why these forums (and others like them) are still frequented.
1) Just because something is technically legal doesn't mean it should be allowed in a game.
2) Achieving perfect balance is not possible. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to maintain some semblance of it in our games, though.
If you don't comprehend those basic things, then I have a hard time believing that you've ever DMed any game more than a 1-shot. I also question your maturity as a person.
First and foremost if you come to this forum in order to flame people to a personal level,I am starting to estimate your IQ number to around 30.This gets even lower if you think you can judge things like maturity from the way someone plays DnD.
Secondly I am in the unfortunate possition of playing the DM for the last six years (the last four in the same campaign and the previous two in an old version of the same world) consecutively and I never had any complains about how much power a player had (and at times it has reached the level of Pun Pun in other words infinity).I recently converted to pathfinder but before that,a spellcaster could and would use a candle of invocation to summon an efreeti to grand wishes to create magic items with no cost and in an infinite manner.A spellcaster could time stop for as long as he wanted with persistent time stops and reload his arsenal while having half the continent changed,I allowed the bargest's combo that can grant nigh infinite physical stats in 3.5 and an NPC who had similar interests used it (not against that player of course as it didn't connected into his story and I did it to play the NPC as good as I could according to his intelligence not to destroy the player which the NPC would have done only if they had crossed roads which never happened).
Those are only a minimum example of what I have played with as a DM in matters of strength (possible infinity to any game dimension) so let me take a minute to laugh with what you consider broken:The mere ability of one pityfull psion to recharge his power points with a little meditation like it was done in 2nd edition where psionics were first analysed into a system to a satisfying level.
In other words something that was considered the standard until some years ago.
Where does your semblance of balance start and where does it end,what should be allowed and what should not?You haven't even placed the limits of what you want to play with. Should I do the same?
Why is that right?WHY is that in any way mature:to play a game in which you are ignoring the rules-any rule could be ignored in the name of balance- and ruin the fun of a player that worked with them in order for you to feel better or another player not to feel bad about his character's uselessnes?Where do you find the maturity in being unjust to a friend because of an other person's whim. The maturity is in playing your character with whatever happens to him:he may become powerful,he may become born and die without having achieved any goal or holding any real power but those don't matter,he is your character,the thing you like to play.Complaining about what broken combos the other characters have is immature and pitiful at the very least and I would never let a person who acts like that to be in my campaign (and I never have tolerated it).Just for the mention's sake I will note that every person above the age of twenty I've ever played with as a DM has never bitched about the others' powers,as everyone deemed it ridiculus for persons their age.
Anyway, I never tried to make you play like me I would appreciate for you to do the same.As for the rules, as I mentioned in the previous post they are used unless otherwise noted so I answer with them as the basis (I personally happen to never have ignored them as a DM besigning my world around them as if they where the laws of that universe but if I changed a rule,it would be from the begining of a campaign in order to form a specific world and not to limit the power).
At last if I fail as a DM,I let my players deside and not some stranger ignorant about my style of play.I already have more than ten persons having their vote on me as a good DM so I will go with their opinion.The two points you mention look like handicaps in my eyes:They are used if you are part of some terrible accident or born with less luck than many others.I find no reason to pursue balance as it is not fun in a fantasy game in my point of view and if I ignore a rule in the middle of a campaign to enhance the fun (anyone's fun even mine) what makes me not ignore any rule to do the same,all the time:why should my dragon die only because I botched,for that creature a natural 1 should not be a failure,why should they defeat that guy without having learned his story yet just because they threw three fireballs at him ,fireballs don't do damage to this guy...and so on..
Where should that end and were should it not and why?
The only objective way to do this is to predecide the rules and then take them like a man,else if anyone feels unjustisfied about a change you are at fault (even if he never mentions it as a sign of maturity that doesn't change a thing:you have cheated and you are wrong).
Secondly I am in the unfortunate possition of playing the DM for the last six years
I don't bother throwing the fact that i've been DMing for 23+ years around, not to mention that this is the internet, anyone can say anything. However long time DMs will always understand a few things from the common shared experience which you just failed to show.
I must admit I completely despise that style of play (the gentle until not so gentlemans agreement) and say that it is full of pretention and ambiguation as one can never completely understand what another deems overpowered.
NPC who had similar interests used it (not against that player of course as it didn't connected into his story and I did it to play the NPC as good as I could according to his intelligence not to destroy the player which the NPC would have done only if they had crossed roads which never happened).
Hypocrite much?
Secondly,a player shouldn't sneak a combo in.Never. He instead should do it oppenly and shouldn't be judged for that.
Previously posted
"3.5 gets a lot of hate from DMs because many immature players pull tricks without discussion with the DM"
"Aside from that,you happen to think that a player is immature if he makes his strategy without asking the DM first?"
Hypocrisy No. 2
If one of my friends would toss one of my characters out of his campaign for a reason like this,I would take that particular game far from seriously.
So if you openly try to get a combo by telling your DM you want infinite stats and he tells you "no". then you would take his game "far from seriously"
In short, if a person states he wants to make Pun Pun and the DM says "No", apparently the DM is a ****.
I could continue pointing out examples from your own words but then everyone who has read this post would understand it would only waste my time
All this points to 2 things
i) You cannot think in a logical manner, which is also the reason you insult people's IQ (because you think you are smart but are consistently shown up in RL)
ii) You're a player who keeps trying to hold DMs to the rules (even when rule 0 is the first rule) and a rubbish DM (if even your statement of being a DM can be taken seriously)
Thanks and bye
I am also entitled to do it but will not fall as low.I will just state the obvious.
(I can call you short having the same evidence about it as what you have to call me a hypocrite.)
It is really sad to know that a person your age would act like a 15 year old and I must admit that from your words I didn't realise that you have been there playing for more than a year.
Just in case there are any doughts of my words after the rumbling of this old sycophand, I ment every word with its meaning exactly like written.
I let the player do a strong character and without having any drawbacks while using the idea not against him but in a manner of reflavoring the campaign (he actually never met the guy with the combo,other players did).As for the second point of hypocrisy...can't you really at the age of 33+ grasp the concept of an opposite point of view?If yes I pity you.
.
That if I am able to think in a logical manner...I can't even step on it but my logic works,its called human you should try some someday (instead of the apeish one).And I insult peoples' IQs only when they have really earned it:People that act as you do and people that hit themselves with blunt items on the head with no reason.
I am a player who upholds the rules but unlike you (of what I've come to understand)not a rubbish DM as it is stated by my players.
And to hold the manners:
Thanks and bye.
EVERYONE who thinks even the slightes different then me is stupid! that is what manicman phaedrusxy are saying....and yes that is how it sounds. and that is how stupid all those "i am dm 2000 years+" sound the guy was trying to make a point to show that he isnt trying to circumvert the dm or to do a tactic behind his back.
I dont like it when you guys are so absolute..,
i mean what business is it of yours how people decide to play? Even if someone said that they dont play it by the rules what you guys say would be too much. and endline is if everyone in the campaing plays by the same rules isnt that fair anyways? but that question is besides the point
the point is who gives you the right to go in a personal level? who gives you the right to say such thing just cause someone things different?
The end line is: you are the dm you decide how your campaign-adventure etc is going and the players decide if they wana join in. it is different trying to say how the dm should dm and to have some discussions as to how to rule it. and if if you wana talk about rule 0 HOW can you DARE to say that he is a lousy dm if he (by your logic and opinion) does it different?
WHO is the hypocrite now? or do you by zero law mean "my way of playing" and every dm should do it as i do?
And yes i just did it personal didnt i maniacman? but you know what? i am not a hypocrite cause i got the right to make it personal after the way you wrote!
Maniacman wrote:"All this points to 2 things
i) You cannot think in a logical manner, which is also the reason you insult people's IQ (because you think you are smart but are consistently shown up in RL)
ii) You're a player who keeps trying to hold DMs to the rules (even when rule 0 is the first rule) and a rubbish DM (if even your statement of being a DM can be taken seriously)
"
i would like to ask you to make a few corrections...like you dont think in a logical manner...but so does no human being! only computers are destined with the curse to do that
and i would like to say that YOUR statement of being a dm can not be taken seriously and of that i am sure...
anyway the dm is the one who decides how to play his game. IF you do something by the rules it is polite but not necessary to allways ask. if the time comes and he asks how you did something you can talk about it,or if you have the feeling that something isnt as he would like it ask beforehand.
If he doesnt like it he is free to change it. yes i dont agree about the fact that his game shouldnt be taken seriously but guess what, that is my opinion !
BUT WE CANT GO ON THE ASSMPTION THAT THE DM WILL NOT ALLOW SOMETHING WRITEN! cause if we do that it would be logical to assume that he isnt playing DnD.
Yes i am A dm and a player myself and have played in campaings-adventures where things were not allowed and where things where allowed etc. Let me tell you in both cases i had fun! as long as the rules apply to everyone the difference is small in my humble (or not so humble) opinion. If you play the game no matter the rules and have fun you are doing it right!
and if you only want to play in a specific way good luck find your group have fun etc. but dont try to make everyone tadopt your houserules or you way of playing. and when we talk to this forum we have to go by RAW unless otherwise noted by the poster, cause otherwise everyone can say whatever he likes!
one random question: What happens if a psicrystal dies? A familiar dying is bad news, but I could not find anything about the psicrystal.
Q: What happens when my psicrystal dies?
A: The official response from Customer Service is "You can get another one." That is all that is written on the subject, as it wasn't addressed in Complete Psionics. Come up with a suitable houserule -- personally, I've tried a few different ones, but from now on will be using the simplest, inspired by the Tome of Magic: It reforms on its own after 24 hours. I must stress, though, this is a house rule -- no official method of getting a psicrystal back exists (though it's clear you do get another one), and no penalty exists when it dies (beyond not having your crystal around).
Source: community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...
2nd.
In v3.e , the psicrystal had a cost, if killed.
Some of the details might be findable on the old psi board.
**
Psionic classes can keep cycling through Psi Focus + a feat or two.
Getting the Touch attack version of Ranged, set of feats,
works wonders in a sniping or guerilla contest.