I sense Kalashtar!

[SteeleTrueheart]

A look at the psionic effects from the D&D rules doesn't indicate it would happen. The abilities appear to give the same kinds of bonuses you could get from magic spells, primarily enhancement.

Yes, I guess that is why I said "They could of course make it non stackable with magic" however, the fact that Shade is desperate to get the +6 STR psionic cookies shows that it DOES stack in DDOland.

The arcane-kalashtar recommended for non-psionic campaigns has a +2 bonus to charisma for the purpose of extra spell use. The race also has +2 on bluff, intimidate, diplomacy, and saves against mind-affecting spells, and 1x use of Mindlink.

If I were adding Kalashtar to DDO they would get many cool powers from enhancements, including Mind Blade and Tashalatora. (In D&D, Tashalatora supports the multiclassing of monk and psionic manifester, so in DDO I would make it allow a sorc/monk character to use charisma in place of wisdom for features such as AC and Stunning Fist, to a limit of 2x monk levels)

"to a limit of 2x monk levels" the devs have never put this type of limitation in yet on multiclassing, doubtful they would now.

though the race does look interesting.

[Angelus_dead]

shows that it DOES stack in DDOland.

It does not show that.

"to a limit of 2x monk levels" the devs have never put this type of limitation in yet on multiclassing

It is not a limitation on multiclassing.

[MDS_Geist]

It might help if you think about it this way:
I suggest adding a new class to DDO, called the "Mizard". A mizard has 4 hp/level, 1 BAB per 2 levels, good Will saves, no armor or weapon proficiencies, and no skill except concentration. But his levels and intelligence give him energy points, which can be spent to create a variety of useful effects from a list, whose effectiveness depends on his level, intelligence, and possibly feats, items, or enhancements.

Would it be a good idea to follow my suggestion and add the Mizard class? Or would that be too similar to some other class that already exists in the game?

Except for the fact that psionics are not magic and there are multiple psionic classes. So as entertaining as that was, it was also pointless.

That is precisely untrue. In reality, games were designed well before computers became available.

Which is entertainingly silly.
In case you're unaware, we're talking about a computer game based on a pen and paper game.

I don't see why I should make the effort, when you're not willing to click on google.com.

Since it is your argument, it is incumbent upon you to prove your point.

[Uska]

Would be cool but I see no cause to get your hopes up even slightly.

[Uska]

Not sure if this was a joke in response to a joke, or that you just didn't get the Star Trek TNG reference?

I am sure most did and I only watched about 6 episodes of that trash of a show.

[Natashaelle]

Psionic character classes are not a prerequisite for introducing Kalashtari (the reverse could be arguably true though). All that's needed is for the game to include Psionics in some form or other, and hey presto what have we got here ?

Nice one OP, think you're onto something

[Angelus_dead]

Psionic character classes are not a prerequisite for introducing Kalashtari (the reverse could be arguably true though). All that's needed is for the game to include Psionics in some form or other, and hey presto what have we got here ?

If there aren't psionic character classes, then the desires of people who say "I wish DDO had psionics" are not being met.

If they were satisfied with psionics aside from class features, then they could simply go into Slavers of the Shrieking Mines and be satisfied with a couple of illithids.

[Angelus_dead]

Except for the fact that psionics are not magic

No, that is exactly false. According to the D&D rules, psionics are magic.

Except for the fact that psionics are not magic and there are multiple psionic classes. So as entertaining as that was, it was also pointless.

It made sense by itself, but I see that it wasn't helpful to you.

Which is entertainingly silly.
In case you're unaware, we're talking about a computer game based on a pen and paper game.

That's senseless.

Since it is your argument, it is incumbent upon you to prove your point.

I did. The fact that you didn't read it doesn't change that, although it does reduce my incentive to respond to you. If you'd like to dispute my explanation, you could go ahead and try.

[Natashaelle]

If there aren't psionic character classes, then the desires of people who say "I wish DDO had psionics" are not being met.

If they were satisfied with psionics aside from class features, then they could simply go into Slavers of the Shrieking Mines and be satisfied with a couple of illithids.

Don't get me wrong -- I think these developments are a STRONG indication that we will get both Kalashtari and at least one Psionic character Class in the upcoming Mods/Updates.

I was just commenting that Kalashtari could perfectly well be introduced *before* any new Psi Character Class(es)

Oh and any DDO parallel of one of my old AD&D characters would *require* Psionics in-game, so I'm all for it ...

[Natashaelle]

No, that is exactly false. According to the D&D rules, psionics are magic.

According to 1st Edition they're not ; 2nd Edition ignored the question ; 3rd Edition provided various options for DMs/Groups.

The default position of the rules is that Magic and Psionics can interact with each other. But one of the proposed variants in 3rd Edition states that they are different and do not affect each other in any way ; another that they are similar but different so that they interact with attached penalties ; another that they are different but interact normally with some exceptions (Dispel Magic not working against Psionics etc on the one hand, but Psionics and Magic not stacking on the other) ; another that they are just different types of Magic ; finally, another variant is that they simply do not exist in your Campaign.

We will see what the DM in this online Campaign decides , however the existence of specific "Psionic" bonuses in DDO as of Mod9 is tending towards the "they are (at least somewhat) different" end of the spectrum, in my opinion.

[Soulken]

According to 1st Edition they're not ; 2nd Edition ignored the question ; 3rd Edition provided various options for DMs/Groups.

The default position of the rules is that Magic and Psionics can interact with each other. But one of the proposed variants in 3rd Edition states that they are different and do not affect each other in any way ; another that they are similar but different so that they interact with attached penalties ; another that they are different but interact normally with some exceptions (Dispel Magic not working against Psionics etc on the one hand, but Psionics and Magic not stacking on the other) ; another that they are just different types of Magic ; finally, another variant is that they simply do not exist in your Campaign.

We will see what the DM in this online Campaign decides , however the existence of specific "Psionic" bonuses in DDO as of Mod9 is tending towards the "they are (at least somewhat) different" end of the spectrum, in my opinion.

Yes but we arent 1st or 2nd edtion are we, and we arent really a varriant of 3.0 either we are 3.5 and as abrassive as A_D can seem sometimes he is right it is considered magic.

[Angelus_dead]

Don't get me wrong -- I think these developments are a STRONG indication that we will get both Kalashtari and at least one Psionic character Class in the upcoming Mods/Updates.

What it looks like is that the devs wanted a different kind of enemy than undead, giants, and devils, so they flipped a coin between Xoriat and Dal Quor and got tails. The "psionic" bonus you see on various magic items was mainly so they'd have another kind of bonus that wasn't the same as existing ones, allowing a new path of loot progression to be created. And of course it provided new flavor text for items, such as the word "Elocator".

As for the possibility of psionic classes in DDO, did you read this thread?
http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=204234

I was just commenting that Kalashtari could perfectly well be introduced *before* any new Psi Character Class(es)

That would miss out on a lot of the flavor of Kalashtar; to deny them connection to psion classes, but to not replace it with the arcane variant. Non-psionic kalashtar rules are provided for D&D:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ebds/20060925a

[Angelus_dead]

The default position of the rules is that Magic and Psionics can interact with each other. But one of the proposed variants in 3rd Edition states that they are different and do not affect each other in any way

The description of those optional variations includes a summary of the implications for game balance, which warn that having psionics be distinct from magic would be a mistake for an MMORPG. It makes it much harder to have balance between psionic and non-psionic player characters.

[SteeleTrueheart]

It does not show that.

It does show that.

The cookies grant a psionic bonus. It stacks. It is the only evidence in game of what psionic bonuses do. Therefore, with all the known evidence, they stack. Your snooty five word childish denial does not change the facts.

It does not show that psionics are being added to the game. It does not show that psionic related races are being added to the game. It does not show that if Turbine introduces true psionics in the future that all psionic bonuses will stack with magic bonuses. It simply shows that for the moment the DM's rule is psionics and magic stack, so are considered separate and distinct. I am eagerly awaiting the result of Shade using one in the presence of a beholder to see if the anti-magic dispels it or not.

It is not a limitation on multiclassing.

Depending on how they set it up it would be. Or it might not be. All moot until they added it, if they added it as you expect, and if they even added that particular ability. Too many ifs to debate it really.

[Natashaelle]

Several good points people -- I think though that ultimately, there is a particular take on Psionics in the Eberron setting, which will likely be mirrored at least in the DDO version.

The implementation and balance issues can be tough to handle in a tabletop game, but at least in DDO we will see universal application of whatever Turbine chooses to implement.

I do not think we will see any of the more extreme variants applied, and I would personally guess that DDO Psionics will be dispellable as magic etc, simply so as to avoid the need to rethink huge numbers of old quests to make them Psi-compatible. But then again, this would depend on exactly which version of Psionics Turbine ended up using, including some potential homebrew rules.

Is still all just castles in the air

[Angelus_dead]

It does show that.

The cookies grant a psionic bonus. It stacks. It is the only evidence in game of what psionic bonuses do. Therefore, with all the known evidence, they stack. Your snooty five word childish denial does not change the facts.

That response is both completely wrong, and completely undeserving of my time to explain why.

For the benefit of others: he is committing a quaternio terminorum fallacy, whereby two separate concepts ("psionic-typed bonuses" and "psionic powers of psionic classes") are treated as if they were one entity, thereby leaping to a conclusion without evidence for it.

The reality is that if Turbine were to add psionic classes such as Psion:
1. They would want to follow the D&D rules for it as much as possible, which means psionic classes grant the same kinds of bonuses they do in D&D, which means types that won't stack with existing spells.
2. They would not want to stupidly unbalance their game, which means psionic classes would give bonuses that generally don't stack with those of existing classes.

I am eagerly awaiting the result of Shade using one in the presence of a beholder to see if the anti-magic dispels it or not.

And since there are magic effects which work within an antimagic field...

Depending on how they set it up it would be. Or it might not be. All moot until they added it, if they added it as you expect, and if they even added that particular ability. Too many ifs to debate it really.

As it was a suggestion invented by me, exactly what it does is defined by what I said it does. According to how I wrote it, it is not a "limitation on multiclassing". If you didn't think it was sufficiently defined to discuss, then you shouldn't have made claims about what it is.

[Borror0]

In case you're unaware, we're talking about a computer game based on a pen and paper game.

In case you're unaware, importing psionics would be a mistake as they would be identical to existing arcane classes (or nearly) due to DDO's house rules. In PnP, the main difference between magic users and psions is that magic uses spell per day and spell slots while the other uses spell points. However, in DDO, magic already uses spell points. As a result, there is no difference between psionic powers and magic powers except in name.

Since it is pointless to have two classes being so similar, psions would need to be changed so that it could be different from magic.

Because of that, implementing psions is much more of a game design challenge than a computer programming challenge: the tech for spells or creating additional resources already exist but, since the psionic powers and magic would be so similar in DDO, the designers will have a lot of work to do if they ever wish to implement psions.

[MDS_Geist]

Since it is pointless to have two classes being so similar, psions would need to be changed so that it could be different from magic.

As you know, psionics is a system and a psion is one of the classes that uses that system. At no point did I suggest psions as a class. There are other classes besides psions such as the psychic warrior and the soulknife.

[Memnir]

They added ki for monks. It's a point & move system. Psionics would be as tedious as adding the monk class.

Agreed. And actually, Monk was the foremost thing on my mind when I said that Psions should only be included if they can be made unique and interesting - as opposed to existing game features repackaged.

To me, the largest appeal of the Monk has been the Unarmed style of combat. And the Dev realized that the default Punch-Punch-Kick unarmed animations would lead to epic failure of the new class - and took the time and effort to make a Monk's unarmed animations not just different but fun to watch. The same, if not more, attention to detail would be needed to put in Psi powers to the game - because to me at least, the spell casting animations would look silly and wrong for mind-powers.

In addition, I'd hope that the Devs would learn from the Monk's example and make sure that all key features of any new class from here on out worked prior to their induction to the game. The year long and ongoing issues with Handwraps has left a bitter taste in my mouth regarding the Monk - and I think a lot of folks share that feeling.



Yes, it would be possible to add Psionics to the game. And yes, it would be fantastic to have more options in class and race selection. But, I only hope to see them if they can be done properly and responsibly.

I don't see the addition of a few Psionic effects and examples of a new race as any indicator we're going to see them anytime soon, however. After all, there has been a Druid on Atraxia's Haven for how long now? Goodness knows I've been wrong before, and I'd love to be wrong here too... but if we see a new race or class, it's likely to be a long ways off. That said, this is a great conversation to have because it shows the Devs that we are interested and eager to see them added - even if it takes time.

[SteeleTrueheart]

That response is both completely wrong, and completely undeserving of my time to explain why.

For the benefit of others: he is committing a quaternio terminorum fallacy, whereby two separate concepts ("psionic-typed bonuses" and "psionic powers of psionic classes") are treated as if they were one entity, thereby leaping to a conclusion without evidence for it.

I have been discussing the Kalashtar race not psionic classes, as per the OP

Let me spell it out in even simpler terms for you and more slowly. I admit I could have been a little more clearer as you seem to be pedantic.

Here is my quote:
"It does not show that if Turbine introduces true psionics in the future that all psionic [ability granted] bonuses will stack with magic bonuses."
This shows I clearly believe that psionic powers and psionic-typed bonuses are different things, because I also said:

"The cookies grant a psionic[-type] bonus. It stacks. It is the only evidence in game of what psionic bonuses do. Therefore, with all the known evidence, they stack."

Now that shows that I believe they are different things however, I do believe they are related. Obviously I interpret the fact of there being a psionic-type bonus, that it would be granted by a psionic power or feat etc. Unless you are saying psionic-type bonuses (which are in game) would not be granted by psionic powers/abilities...?

The reality is that if Turbine were to add psionic classes such as Psion:
1. They would want to follow the D&D rules for it as much as possible, which means psionic classes grant the same kinds of bonuses they do in D&D, which means types that won't stack with existing spells.
2. They would not want to stupidly unbalance their game, which means psionic classes would give bonuses that generally don't stack with those of existing classes.

I will ignore the fact that I am talking about a race and you are talking about classes, since I am saying that if this race was created it would have psionic abilities that would ... oh why bother nicely debating this, let me do the A_D style...
1. Is your assumption. We all know exactly how close Monk is to PnP.
2. I agree and already stated so:

The main problem with adding psionics (from a gameplay perspective) that I see is that it would add to that powercreep the Devs have been trying to reduce. Suddenly everyone would have stat/to hit/damage/AC bonuses with the psionic tag that would probably stack with all existing bonuses.

They could of course make it non stackable with magic if it was essentialy a similar spell, but then what would a psionic character bring over an arcane/divine character?

And since there are magic effects which work within an antimagic field...

I am willing to be educated in this. What (non store bought) self buffing potion works in a beholders anti magic field?