Alpha Release - Phrenic Slayer Prestige Class

You have a point, but this class has other features - like gaining full BAB! - that are still useful across the board. That said, unless the adventure path or campaign is focussed against a psionic foe (like illithids, or the Inspired from the Eberron setting) this class isn't going to see a lot of mileage ...

Dabbler273 wrote:

... this class has other features - like gaining full BAB! ...

Which totally rocks.

Dabbler273 wrote:

... unless the adventure path or campaign is focussed against a psionic foe (like illithids, or the Inspired from the Eberron setting) this class isn't going to see a lot of mileage ...

I think you may well be right, but I'd love to play one anyway just to see how it turns out. I think I may pencil this in for a game I have planned for next calendar year.

I didn't think about the Reidra/Sarlona campaign option. Holy cow ... This would be most excellent for an Inspired-vs.-Kalashtar game, especially if you're playing the full Secrets of Sarlona option. Great idea, Dabbler.

Yes, I like Eberron and that is one of few settings where psionics and magic are really integrated.

guys, this is a PrC remember? which means that among other things, you can choose to take it. I would seriously hope no player would take this without knowing he'll get a lot of use out of the class features. and to be honest, if he does take it in a game where he's rendered useless, that his own damn fault.

Also, as a PrC i don't see that this needs to be powered down too much. and i don't know if the favored enemy ability should be focused on just one type of psionic type. Psionic is a type, at least enough of one for the purposes of a PrC.

Lordmonkeysama wrote:

and to be honest, if he does take it in a game where he's rendered useless, that his own damn fault.

Actually, that's not necessarily true. I've been in games where classes were taken under the impression that they would be useful in the campaign, and then the GM went entirely away from what we'd been told and they ended up useless.

Or worse, games where you want to play a class in one direction, and the GM seems stuck in the thought that it only works in the most commonly played manner, so you aren't actually capable of the encounters that are built 'for you'.

true, the point remains however that one shouldn't design anything based around how it'll play out in a particular game.

If we assumed that, no-one would be able to plan to do anything!

If a campaign is psionic-heavy, the phrenic slayer is pretty good. If it isn't, then it's still useful insofar as a Pscyhic Warrior could take it, for example, and get several levels of both full BAB and power progression, it's just not as useful.

I know what you mean, Maverick. Sometimes that happens, and you have no control over it.

MaverickWolf wrote:

I've been in games where classes were taken under the impression that they would be useful in the campaign, and then the GM went entirely away from what we'd been told and they ended up useless.

Maverick makes a great point here, and I submit that it affects nearly all psionic classes -- not just the PrCs.

I've been in games where the DM fully approved a psionic character (along with their backstory, character arc hooks and design) only to nerf all of the character's powers after the game was underway. There are all sorts of flimsy rationalizations to be made to "justify" the retroactive design changes, but in the end, only one point remains valid: the DM violated the agreement he'd/she'd made with the player over the design and rule set to be played.

In the end, the collaborative storytelling exercise that is a decent game requires trust, cooperation and creative research from both parties. If the DM RetCons a PC or nerfs a rule set, or if the player goes heavy-munchkin or actively undermines the plot, everyone loses. The game experience will suck no matter how good the adventure is.

All that said, the point I'd like to emphasize here is that a basic class or PrC that focuses on only one narrow type of opponent (e.g., the old XPH Illithid Slayer) puts both the player and the DM in a bad spot when it comes to adventure balance. The PC is either awesome (against her chosen foe) or meh (against everything else in the adventure). It's like having a party full of ninjas in an adventure built around ballroom dancing.

This is one of the key reasons why Robert E. Howard's Conan was such a powerful and compelling character: in our game terms, the character had levels in rogue, in barbarian, in fighter and (probably) even in marshall (towards the end, when he seized the crown of Aquilonia). While the "design" may be inefficient from a BAB or skill points perspective, the character was able to jump from one setting to another and from one role to another with ease (e.g., pirate to thief to mailed knight, etc.). This flexibility in employment keeps the character viable (i.e., useful to the story).

I submit that we need this same measure of viability for our psionic characters if they're to be viable outside of a psionics-focused milieu. It's one thing to be Billy-Bad-Brain when the Illithids come to town; it's quite another (usually boring, sometimes humiliating) to be rendered useless and sidelined when the more pedestrian villains re-take center stage. A lot of this has to do with the DM's willingness to fold psionics into the greater campaign setting. Some of it has to do with the player's build choices. Some of it, however, has to do with the class features and design choices that we make in creating these BCs and PrCs. If we make them so strongly optimized for psionics that they lose utility in the other-than-psionics context, then we've potentially done both DMs and players everywhere a disservice.

Sorry for getting up on my soapbox. I'm not trying to indirectly protest any other poster's points; rather, I'm just looking to convey a overarching concept that's been giving me a lot of grief lately.

Thanks for reading. We now return you to your regularly scheduled PrC analysis. Embarassed

These are useful points to take up though, allowing us to see that a class might need to be broader, instead of just offering options. Would a game design where the Slayer chooses a "Prey/Quarry" and gains their benefits against only that (psionic) enemy in each combat/day/whatever?

that sounds good, but would need Detect Psionics active to identify the psionic targets. maybe gained as an at-will ability?

the problem here lies in making the class useful in most situations, yet truly excel vs psionic encounters.

I think if we focused most of the abilities gained as vs psionics, but added in some solid all around ones it could work.

Since this is a slayer oriented class, what about the ability add the Bane quality to a given weapon? which could stack with other properties. obviously in most cases the slayer would choose Bane(psionic/phrenic) but when there's nothing of the sort, some other Bane would do.

Also, what about a Depletion strike, where when you successfully hit a PP using character they loose some amount of PPs(or spell levels) but vs non PP users, they suffer Int/Wis/Cha damage?(not all three necessarily)

I have to agree with what's been said so far regarding overspecialization: taken too far, that makes the character TOO good for some situations, and worthless for everything else.

Except for the ninjas in the ballroom dancing adventure. That would be awesome.

As points of consideration, I raise Paladins, Rogues, and Rangers.

Paladins received an excellent upgrade to their Smite Evil ability. Now, admittedly, Smite Evil ONLY works on EVIL enemies... but in the majority of games, the adventurers can be fairly confident that a majority of the enemies faced will, in fact, be Evil, but there may be the Neutral elemental or golem or whathaveyou. In other words, the Smite Evil ability is almost guaranteed to be useful, but perhaps not so useful against Oozes and Elementals.

Rogues received an upgrade to their Sneak Attack. Now, they are foiled by Oozes and Elementals. Incorporeal (often Undead) foes are also immune unless the Rogue is using a Ghost Touch weapon. And that's it. Undead, Constructs, Plants? Sneak Attack! In other words, the Sneak Attack ability is almost guaranteed to be useful, but perhaps not so useful against Oozes and Elementals.

... ok. Notice a trend here? Rarely will you find a campaign dedicated to the fighting solely of oozes. Some campaigns WILL explore the elemental planes, but that is not the norm, either. The Paladin's Smite Evil ability is arguably less commonly-usable than the Rogue's Sneak Attack now, but you won't find many Paladins complaining about it anymore.

The Ranger, over the course of his 20 levels, gains the Favored Enemy ability 5 times. He isn't forced to pick one Favored Enemy and stick with it; he can naturally evolve with the campaign, selecting the enemies that he is actively facing. Admittedly, a DM could STILL screw him over by suddenly dropping all enemies of the types he has already chosen, but that's just DM being a butt. In other words, the Favored Enemy ability is almost guaranteed to be useful against at least some of the enemies being faced.

The Ranger ALSO gains Favored Terrains. In other words, even if specific enemies aren't being faced, it's much more obvious if the DM is suddenly whisking adventurers from the desert to dungeons to ocean adventures, *just* as the Ranger gains such as his Favored Terrain (if your DM is yanking your chain around that much, get a new DM). Favored Terrain is a lot more 'stable' than any single wandering monster encounter chart, and thus almost guaranteed to be useful most of the time if chosen properly.

Now, consider Phrenic Slayer. It is like a Ranger - an EXTREEEEME Ranger, of hunting Psionics. Obviously, you can represent this somewhat via Favored Enemy like a Ranger. However, that does run the risk of making the Slayer *too good* against purely psionic foes, and kinda worthless (at least in that respect) against other foes. So, while some Favored Enemy 'slots' would definitely be good, maybe something else might be better.

Lordmonkeysama mentioned adding the Bane quality to a weapon, or a sort of Depletion strike. I'd recommend an evolution of that: how about a sort of Smite Psionic attack, one that adds a special anti-psionic property such as Dissipater, Mindcrusher, Psibane, and/or Suppression? (Dissipater is +1, the others are all +2-equiv. abilities) Alternately, the Smite attack could inflict a sort of psionic dampener effect that temporarily hinders the manifestation of psionic powers and abilities.

Now, what if the DM just isn't throwing psionic enemies at you?

Create a sort of 'abstinence' or 'reserve' advantage. Each day, as long as the Slayer has not made a Smite Psionic attack, she benefits from some other secondary benefit. This benefit shouldn't be as potent as the Smite attack itself, of course, but still a considerable enough benefit that the Slayer is noticing it (and, hopefully, the DM will feel prompted to toss in some psionic enemies, if only to 'discharge' the reserve bonus).

Exactly WHAT the reserve bonus should be... good question, very open to input on that. I'll toss out a suggestion to get the ball rolling:

Paranoia: You know THEY are lurking out there. You haven't seen them recently, but you know they are only trying to lull you into a false sense of security. Fortunately, you know better. Your senses are taut, just waiting for that telltale sign that they are approaching...
Advantage: Add a +2 bonus to your Perception, Sense Motive and Initiative checks. This bonus increases cumulatively each day you have not used your Smite Psionic ability, to a maximum equal to twice your Slayer level.

Yes, that means that a level 10 Slayer who has gone 10 days without seeing an illithid, aboleth, or other significant psionic threat is so twitchy, she has a +20 bonus to Perception, Sense Motive and Initiative checks. If I were the DM, I'd be darn sure to toss something psionic at them! Please note that the monster would need to be powerful enough for the Slayer to want to use the Smite Psionic ability. One single monster every 10 days is obviously just the DM trying to 'disarm' the Slayer, but if the DM starts throwing a psionic monster every single day at the Slayer to 'disarm' her, then obviously the reserve trait has done its job and she'll start Smiting regularly again.

If anyone else has a good idea for a 'reserve' benefit, toss it out!

Aside from that...

As a passive trait, I'd suggest letting the Slayer take any of the feats that are normally prohibited if you have a power point reserve, or use gear that normally penalizes psionic wielders (like Psibane weapons) without penalty. It's a small thing, but something that'd definitely set him apart from the other psionic characters in a high psionics campaign.

Enemy Sense is currently set to detect "the presence of her favored enemy within 60'." How about a Detect Psionics ability that lets her use Detect Psionics at will, but the Slayer can, as a Move action, concentrate on a single item or creature within 60' and determine its Manifester level if any (5th or lower = Faint, 6th-11th = Moderate, 12-20th = Strong, 21+ = Overwhelming)? Basically a psionic version of the Paladin's Detect Evil.

Syonique wrote:

Except for the ninjas in the ballroom dancing adventure. That would be awesome.

Dr Masaaki Hatsume, 34th Soke (Grandmaster) of Togakure Ryu Ninjitsu, spent two years studying dance in order to understand body movement better .... Ninjas are awesome dancers.

Here's a few suggestions and ideas:

Smite-equivalent: Rather than inflicting damage, deduct power points.

Generally Useful Abilities: Detect Psionics is a good idea, as would any enhanced perception and mental protection abilities.

Combat Ability: As I see it this is the big advantage the class offers - full BAB is useful to any wilder, psychic wsarrior or even psion. It makes this class the Eldritch Knight of the psionics system, which could be built on significantly.

Newbie Joined: Feb 05, 2010 Posts: 24 Karma: 0

Lordmonkeysama wrote:

if he does take it in a game where he's rendered useless, that his own damn fault.

Not true. A lot of times it's the DM's.

I ask for a revision on the "Special" for this. Change it to "must have killed, survived an attack from, or have a hatred for" that particular psionic. Because there are tons of dick DMs out there who do nothing but teleport their NPCs out of combats when they have less than 10% of their hit points left. In that regard, you'd NEVER be able to get that PrC. A Slayer should be about revenge just as much as they are about taking those beings off the face of the planet. As Syonique pointed out, you should be allowed to pick more than one. If I know you're only able to take on one type of psionic because of your special, chances are you'll never see THAT psionic again. You'll have everything else after you.

With regards to the ranger build, instead of having FE +8 at the end, why not another Quarry (or improved quarry if you already have it), or Evasion (or improved evasion if you already have it), etc. Something more ranger like. A ranger has five FE's over 20 levels. It's not necessary for the slayer to have four over 10.

Also, why is the PsiCraft skill taken off the original?

I love that you get Power Resistance now.

While one could arguably just change "Killed" to "Defeated", as in, "Defeated and got XP for"... one should also make sure the SLAYER is actually SLAYING his enemies, as opposed to, say... *taking them captive*. So! Just make it "Slain or defeated (without capturing or otherwise dealing with peacefully)". If you mortally wound them and they flee, you still beat them (up).

kevin_video wrote:

Also, why is the PsiCraft skill taken off the original?

Because there is no longer a Psicraft skill.

About replacing Enemy Sense with some form of Detect Psionics, I tnink the problem lies in the flavor of the original class. The original class is not only about tracking down and slaying, it's also about being alert and not be surprised by a monster capable of instantly killing any character, potentially capable of doing a Total Party Kill. Changing into a form of Detect Psionics or some Detect Evil-like ability takes away that flavor.

I throw the question into the air... is this class meant to be "just another ranger PrC"? Or is it meant to be some hunter who, if not for his/her extreme paranoia and alertness, would easily become food for the top-of-the-food-chain psionic predators?

The concept of this PrC is "a prey becoming the predator of its former predator", in other words, "a predator that is also the bait for his/her prey". Replace Enemy Sense with Detect Psionics and the concept is lost.

kevin_video wrote:

Also, why is the PsiCraft skill taken off the original?

Because Psicraft was merged into Spellcraft.

EDIT: Also, about the Paladin's Detect Evil... does the Paladin have Survival skill? Does the Paladin have the Track feat in 3e/3.5e? Does the Paladin have Listen and Spot in 3e? Does it have Perception in Pathfinder? That's what Detect Evil is for! It's meant to complement the Paladin's lack of those skills. On the other hand, the Ranger and the Slayer have all of those, they even have bonuses on them! They don't need no such thing as Detect Psionics, just a skill check and that's it. Enemy Sense is an additional ability to keep them alert.