# The (new) Immortals Handbook Thread



## Upper_Krust

Hi all! 

Okay I have decided to call time on the old thread - so if moderators are at hand feel free to lock it. 

I have just updated my website with the first monster from the Bestiary. Amilictli (All-Relentless Thunders). 

There are probably one or two things that might change in the final version (note 'Boredom' might be deleted and simply referenced within the text; vengeful gaze may be given a save). Also of note is that its Challenge Rating based on WotC CRs, not my revised system to avoid confusion.  

I will add the illustration tomorrow, then the following day I will add another monster from the Bestiary.


----------



## Verequus

I am the first - to subscribe it!


----------



## Samuel Leming

I'm very much interested in the Immortals Handbook, so I welcome your new thread.

I didn't read much of your old thread.  It felt too much like I was reading somebody's private conversations.

Um... When will you publish?

Sam


----------



## Knight Otu

Samuel Leming said:
			
		

> Um... When will you publish?
> 
> Sam



That's the one million dollar question, isn't it? 

I'd certainly delete boredom. Elemental subtype? Why not elemental type? Remember the thing about the thunder worms.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey there Samuel! 



			
				Samuel Leming said:
			
		

> I'm very much interested in the Immortals Handbook, so I welcome your new thread.
> 
> I didn't read much of your old thread.  It felt too much like I was reading somebody's private conversations.




Yes, I thought 72 pages might be somewhat intimidating for people to jump into. Also it was getting a bit unwieldy for me.



			
				Samuel Leming said:
			
		

> Um... When will you publish?




...y'know if I had a dollar for every time I've been asked that...   

The only answer I can give is 'as soon as possible'. I get my fingers burnt giving out dates, and there have been a number of personal things stifling progress - not least my own ineptitude it would seem. But I'll get there in the end.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hiya mate! 



			
				Knight Otu said:
			
		

> That's the one million dollar question, isn't it?




Beat me to it, darn you. 



			
				Knight Otu said:
			
		

> I'd certainly delete boredom.




That will likely be dropped.



			
				Knight Otu said:
			
		

> Elemental subtype? Why not elemental type?




Well it can't be both and it gains the best stats from being, first and foremost, an Outsider.



			
				Knight Otu said:
			
		

> Remember the thing about the thunder worms.




Yes but I'm just thinking, thunder worm is a generic term and might refer to a monster I am creating.


----------



## Kavon

Wooh, new thread :3

Well, anyway, I'm still lurking in here, waiting to see how things progress XP

Hmm.. * goes back to pondering what to do with his own stuff * :X


----------



## Wolv0rine

I've been following the other thread, kinda-sorta, off and on, and I've been wondering (might be in the other thread somewhere, but I'm not searching through 75 pages to find it)...  you're working on the Bestiary, but what about the main Immortals Handbook itself?  Are you just working on the bestiary first, or did you finish the main book and I missed it?


----------



## Impeesa

Subscribed!

Preview = cool.  Though it looks to me like it has regeneration with no means of bypassing it - is that a simple omission? Most of the ELH abominations have some fast healing, and then regeneration negated by appropriately aligned weapons or weapons meeting some flavorful condition.

--Impeesa--


----------



## CRGreathouse

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Also of note is that its Challenge Rating based on WotC CRs, not my revised system to avoid confusion.




And I thank you for that.  The 'double-CR' notation was confusing, and since the systems are equivilant (just multiply appropriately) I'm happy to see the simplification.

On a similar note: Would you glance at this CR list of creatures from your site?  I'm a bit confused by a few, and a brief clarification or three would help.

* Crown Naga (25) -- 25/38, I guess, but maybe 17/25?
* Epic Tarrasque (44/66)
* Amilictli (85/128)
* Talos (128) -- 85/128 or 128/188?
* Godzilla (120/200) -- shouldn't this be 133/200 or 120/180?
* King Ghidorah (133/200)


----------



## Campbell

Hey Upper Krust,

In the previous thread you mentioned having to writeup some new epic spells for inclusion in the Beastiary. Will these spells be built using your epic spellcasting system or WotC's?


----------



## Fieari

The Amilictli is sweet... I love how you added those possible adventure hooks at the bottom.  I can just imagine having an adventuring party of about level 25 or so working to evacuate a town-- or entire Kingdom-- from this thing's path, attempting to divert it elsewhere, working diplomacy to get help from higher powers... the ideas just flow.

I know that when my players hit epic (they're just about halfway there now) I'm going to more or less destroy the world they live on in grand apocalyptic fashion.  One ... or more ... of these would go well to that end.


----------



## Angel Tarragon

Cool monster Krust!


----------



## Angel Tarragon

Upper Krust said:
			
		

> Okay, with a bit of luck this should hopefully be the last pre-release Immortals Handbook thread.



Third thread Krust. I'm starting to notice the crumbs at my feet. Just kidding......







maybe.


----------



## Anabstercorian

Great critter!  Publish or perish!  Puppies die by the second!


----------



## Impeesa

Frukathka said:
			
		

> Third thread Krust. I'm starting to notice the crumbs at my feet.




Is that not counting the Worship Points System threads that predate the actual book title? If you count those, I'm sure it's more than three. 

--Impeesa--


----------



## Angel Tarragon

Hmmm, guess I never noticed that thread. Link?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey all!

Okay from now on I'll try and answer all previous questions in one post, in an attempt to keep the page count down.

Hey Kavon dude! 



			
				Kavon said:
			
		

> Wooh, new thread :3
> 
> Well, anyway, I'm still lurking in here, waiting to see how things progress XP
> 
> Hmm.. * goes back to pondering what to do with his own stuff * :X




I appreciate the lurking.

Howdy Wolv0rine! 



			
				Wolv0rine said:
			
		

> I've been following the other thread, kinda-sorta, off and on, and I've been wondering (might be in the other thread somewhere, but I'm not searching through 75 pages to find it)... you're working on the Bestiary, but what about the main Immortals Handbook itself? Are you just working on the bestiary first, or did you finish the main book and I missed it?




The Apotheosis section of the Immortals Handbook is about 50% complete, I just thought it would be easier to finish off the Bestiary first (shows what I know!).

Hey Impeesa mate! 



			
				Impeesa said:
			
		

> Subscribed!
> 
> Preview = cool.  Though it looks to me like it has regeneration with no means of bypassing it - is that a simple omission? Most of the ELH abominations have some fast healing, and then regeneration negated by appropriately aligned weapons or weapons meeting some flavorful condition.




Well the thing is, right before all the abominations in the Bestiary is half a page explaining abominations, how to build them, expanded ability scores table (up to Titanic), all their traits and so forth. So it outlines how all abomination regeneration is defeated by the same elements as its damage reduction.

It was just a method of saving space (the abomination traits bit in the amilictli entry you can see isn't in the amilictli entry in the bestiary), I'm getting to the point where every entry (except the Golems) are at least two pages long (and thats with Monster Manual sized layout/text!)

Hey CRGreathouse matey! 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> And I thank you for that. The 'double-CR' notation was confusing, and since the systems are equivilant (just multiply appropriately) I'm happy to see the simplification.








			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> On a similar note: Would you glance at this CR list of creatures from your site? I'm a bit confused by a few, and a brief clarification or three would help.
> 
> * Crown Naga (25) -- 25/38, I guess, but maybe 17/25?
> * Epic Tarrasque (44/66)
> * Amilictli (85/128)
> * Talos (128) -- 85/128 or 128/188?
> * Godzilla (120/200) -- shouldn't this be 133/200 or 120/180?
> * King Ghidorah (133/200)




For my system, the bigger numbers. So Crown Naga would be 38, Godzilla 200, Talos 188 etc. I'll have to check over Godzillas stats - I can't recall offhand which one is the more accurate.



			
				Campbell said:
			
		

> Hey Upper Krust,




Hey Campbell dude! 



			
				Campbell said:
			
		

> In the previous thread you mentioned having to writeup some new epic spells for inclusion in the Beastiary.




Yes a silly oversight on my part, I knew there was a reason why I initially had things 1) Apotheosis, 2) Grimoire, 3) Bestiary, 4) Chronicle.



			
				Campbell said:
			
		

> Will these spells be built using your epic spellcasting system or WotC's?




They will be built around WotCs spellcasting system at this juncture (I mean otherwise I'd have to include the spell system in the Bestiary!). When I finish the Grimoire I'll have them both ways.

Hello Fieari mate! 



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> The Amilictli is sweet... I love how you added those possible adventure hooks at the bottom. I can just imagine having an adventuring party of about level 25 or so working to evacuate a town-- or entire Kingdom-- from this thing's path, attempting to divert it elsewhere, working diplomacy to get help from higher powers... the ideas just flow.
> 
> I know that when my players hit epic (they're just about halfway there now) I'm going to more or less destroy the world they live on in grand apocalyptic fashion. One ... or more ... of these would go well to that end.




Glad you like it. All the monsters have at least three adventure ideas (dragons have five because of the greater CR spread), the first generally involves using the monster indirectly (for parties not tough enough to defeat the monster), the second is usually an excuse to fight it, the third is a way to challenge even more powerful parties with the monster.

The Bestiary also explains the Adventure CR groupings (eg. Mid-epic is for Levels 41-80, quasi-deities and demigods etc.)

I think the Anakim (which I'll post tomorrow) is a more approachable monster, its only CR 45.



			
				Frukathka said:
			
		

> Cool monster Krust!




Thanks Frukathka mate! 



			
				Frukathka said:
			
		

> Third thread Krust. I'm starting to notice the crumbs at my feet. Just kidding......maybe.






			
				Impeesa said:
			
		

> Is that not counting the Worship Points System threads that predate the actual book title? If you count those, I'm sure it's more than three.




This is actually the 14th thread if memory serves me correct...although my memory rarely, if ever, serves me correct.



			
				Frukathka said:
			
		

> Hmmm, guess I never noticed that thread. Link?




Deleted a long time ago.



			
				Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> Great critter! Publish or perish! Puppies die by the second!




Oi! You big meanie!


----------



## Angel Tarragon

Hey, Krust. I have a couple questions for you. Having been to your (Immortals Handbook) site within the last 12 hours I noticed that youve got Collosal and Macro Fine sizes. What exactly are these?


----------



## historian

Hello U_K!  

I think the new post, and the staggered release of creatures is a good idea.

Thanks for answering my question on the other board.


----------



## CRGreathouse

I'll field this one.



			
				Frukathka said:
			
		

> Hey, Krust. I have a couple questions for you. Having been to your (Immortals Handbook) site within the last 12 hours I noticed that youve got Collosal and Macro Fine sizes. What exactly are these?




Collosal would just be a misspelling for Colossal, the lagest size category in the MM.  The MM defines it as 64' and larger, but U_K has it as 64' to 128'.

Titanic is the next size up, at 128' to 256'.  It follows all the patterns set in the core rules -- -16 to AC and attack, +20 to grapple checks, etc.

After that, go through all the sizes Fine to Titanic with Macro- prepended.  Thus Macro-Fine is 256' to 512' and has a -32 AC and attack with a +24 to grapple checks and -24 to Hide checks, while a Macro-Small (2048' to 4096') has a -256 to AC and attacks, +36 grapple, and -36 Hide.

After Macro-Titanic, there's Mega-Fine; continue as above with standard metric prefixes (Mega-Diminutive, Mega-Tiny, ..., Mega-Colossal, Mega-Titanic, Giga-Fine, ...).


----------



## CRGreathouse

Frukathka said:
			
		

> Hmmm, guess I never noticed that thread. Link?




Here are all of the Immortal's Handbook threads I was able to find, with links:

By Date
01. The Worship Points System (2002-01-18)
02. Immortals Handbook (aka The Worship Points System) (2002-02-22)
03. The Immortal`s Handbook (2002-06-04)
04. Upper Krust, where are you? [Immortal's Handbook] (2002-07-24)
05. Immortal's Handbook continuation thread (2003-01-23)
06. Immortal's Handbook continuation thread continuation (2003-03-14)
07. Revised Challenge Ratings/Encounter Levels (pdf) (2003-03-30)
08. Revised CRs/ECLs continuation thread (2003-05-04)
09. immortals handbook (2003-06-30)
10. Revised CRs/ECLs - Thread #3 (2003-08-30)
11. v4: Challenge Ratings pdf (3.5 compatible) (2003-10-15)
12. The Immortals Handbook (2004-01-26)
13. Immortal's Handbook CR/EL Rules: Don't Count Ability Scores (Proof Positive Inside!) (2004-02-17)
14. The (new) Immortals Handbook Thread (2005-01-25)


By Forum Rank (# of posts) (Yes, we have all of the top 7!)
1. The Immortals Handbook (1440 replies)
2. Upper Krust, where are you? [Immortal's Handbook] (794 replies)
3. v4: Challenge Ratings pdf (3.5 compatible) (740 replies)
4. immortals handbook (673 replies)
5. Revised Challenge Ratings/Encounter Levels (pdf) (521 replies)
6. Immortal's Handbook continuation thread (475 replies)
7. Revised CRs/ECLs continuation thread (430 replies)
14. The Worship Points System (232 replies)
17. Immortals Handbook (aka The Worship Points System) (200 replies)
28. Revised CRs/ECLs - Thread #3 (135 replies)
38. Immortal's Handbook continuation thread continuation (109 replies)
66. The Immortal`s Handbook (73 replies)
68. Immortal's Handbook CR/EL Rules: Don't Count Ability Scores (Proof Positive Inside!) (71 replies)
~500. The (new) Immortals Handbook Thread (~20 replies)


By Thread Starter
Anubis
Upper Krust, where are you? [Immortal's Handbook]
Immortal's Handbook CR/EL Rules: Don't Count Ability Scores (Proof Positive Inside!)

Darkness
Revised CRs/ECLs - Thread #3

Dinkeldog
Immortal's Handbook continuation thread
Revised CRs/ECLs continuation thread

Eldorian
Immortal's Handbook continuation thread continuation

kkoie
immortals handbook

Melkor, Lord Of ALL!
The Immortal`s Handbook

Upper_Krust
The Worship Points System
Immortals Handbook (aka The Worship Points System)
Revised Challenge Ratings/Encounter Levels (pdf)
v4: Challenge Ratings pdf (3.5 compatible)
The Immortals Handbook
The (new) Immortals Handbook Thread


----------



## devilish

Ah, a new thread, new beginning....

HI U_K - hope you are well,

Are you still thinking about selling a preview-copy of 1/2 the bestiary 
for us rogues to look at or have you scrapped that idea and
are knuckling down until the finish?

thanks,
-D


----------



## Verequus

I can take this one: Yes, there will be a preview, regardless of the actual date of release.


----------



## Zoatebix

Don't forget level independant XP rewards (http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=86471&page=2), which gets especially good around posts 69 and 70.  In fact, I'd suggest reading the thread backwards from around... I dunno 73?  Or Cheiromancer's last post?  ...some of the later posts are just me bumping the thread... Anyways, the conclusions are more important than how the posters got there, but some of the early opinions expressed and the maths crunched are good to read.

Yay for posting with a fever.  Don't let that deter you from checking out that thread, though.
-George


----------



## CRGreathouse

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> This is actually the 14th thread if memory serves me correct...although my memory rarely, if ever, serves me correct.




By my list above, this is the 14th thread.  Kudos for your memory!

Oh, and thanks for the monster, I enjoyed it.  I'll refrain from posting specific commentary on it, for fear of delaying the 0.5 release and losing my chance at the retributive staff I've had my eyes on.   



			
				Zoatebix said:
			
		

> Don't forget level independant XP rewards (http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=86471&page=2), which gets especially good around posts 69 and 70.




You know, even without that thread and this one, we have over 7% of the posts in the whole forum?


----------



## Zoatebix

> You know, even without that thread and this one, we have over 7% of the posts in the whole forum?




Wow.  That seriously made my day.

Illness update: My fever broke for the 2nd time (first time was yesterday afternoon) - let's hope it stays that way.


----------



## Impeesa

CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> By my list above, this is the 14th thread.




On this incarnation of the boards, you mean.  The first of those is from Jan 2002, which is also the join date of most of the regulars around here. I'm pretty sure I remember WPS threads from before the wipe. 

--Impeesa--


----------



## CRGreathouse

Impeesa said:
			
		

> On this incarnation of the boards, you mean.  The first of those is from Jan 2002, which is also the join date of most of the regulars around here. I'm pretty sure I remember WPS threads from before the wipe.




As do I, but I can't exactly link to the others.  I don't think the Internet Archive has them, although I'll admit to not having checked.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hi all! 

Okay I just managed to sneak the scan of the Amilictli Art  in before midnight my time (I work on the IH during daylight hours and I treated myself to watching the football match earlier this evening hence the delay), there does seem to be a problem with part of the scan being very faint, so I may need to darken parts of it but I think you get the gist of it.

Let me know what you think.

Anakim stats to follow tomorrow evening, with its art the following day.

By the way kudos to CRGreathouse. I thought most of those threads were dead and buried, strange that my old links to those threads in my favourites stopped working a while ago...? But thats a great resource of tomfoolery and highlights my procrastination - well done!


----------



## CRGreathouse

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Okay I just managed to sneak the scan of the Amilictli Art  in before midnight my time (I work on the IH during daylight hours and I treated myself to watching the football match earlier this evening hence the delay), there does seem to be a problem with part of the scan being very faint, so I may need to darken parts of it but I think you get the gist of it.




The picture looks pretty nice, but *1.45 MB*?  That takes time to display!

I look forward to the Anakim, by the way.



			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> By the way kudos to CRGreathouse. I thought most of those threads were dead and buried, strange that my old links to those threads in my favourites stopped working a while ago...? But thats a great resource of tomfoolery and highlights my procrastination - well done!




Hey, I'm just doing my part.  I thought it would be nice to have them all listed somewhere, and this was a convenient place.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hiya mate! 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> The picture looks pretty nice, but *1.45 MB*?  That takes time to display!




I thought there was something wrong with that scan (it took a lifetime to upload). I'll need to redo it anyway to darken some lines. I'm also not sure if the picture is to scale, it might be slightly squashed, I just slapped in the pixel size for the image.

I'll sort it all out tomorrow - I'm off to bed.


----------



## Anabstercorian

Nice art, Craig!  A bit of a relief, too - Never having seen your art before, I was concerned that it wasn't as presentable as you claimed.  Now I see I was wrong to doubt you!

Except for your print dates, those I still doubt.  *WORK HARDER*


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hiya mate! 



			
				Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> Nice art, Craig!  A bit of a relief, too - Never having seen your art before, I was concerned that it wasn't as presentable as you claimed.  Now I see I was wrong to doubt you!




I consider myself a designer first, writer second and artist third.

By the way, does anyone know the best way to get the file size of the image down? The image on the website was colour/600 dpi/100%. This morning I tried it greyscale/400 dpi/66% and it still turned out 1.1 Meg!   



			
				Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> Except for your print dates, those I still doubt.  *WORK HARDER*




Indeed.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> By the way, does anyone know the best way to get the file size of the image down? The image on the website was colour/600 dpi/100%. This morning I tried it greyscale/400 dpi/66% and it still turned out 1.1 Meg!




Photo editing software is a good way, although I'm sure there are other ways.  How small do you want the final image?


----------



## Kavon

Hey U_K :3

Hmm.. You might want to bring the dpi back to 72, since that's all that a monitor's going to give anyway (make a print version and a website version, since for printing it does actually matter), that way the filesize will be decrease by a large leap. :3

Anyway, I don't know what it looks like (*is curious*), since when it was loading it it seemed to give my poor old computer a stroke, so I had to click "back" lots to save my poor computer's sanity (keep it from crashing) :3


----------



## CRGreathouse

Kavon said:
			
		

> Anyway, I don't know what it looks like (*is curious*), since when it was loading it it seemed to give my poor old computer a stroke, so I had to click "back" lots to save my poor computer's sanity (keep it from crashing) :3




Here's a smaller version of the file, darkened like U_K mentioned he wanted.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey all! 

The stats for the Anakim (Silent One) are now on the website.

I was reading over the tactics and I dunno what it is but I am just not that happy with them. If anyone can think up more devastating tactics for the Anakim post them here or email me.

Hey CRGreathouse mate!

Thanks for posting the smaller image for Kavon.



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> Photo editing software is a good way, although I'm sure there are other ways.  How small do you want the final image?




In and around 300-400k would be nice.



			
				Kavon said:
			
		

> Hey U_K :3




Hey Kavon matey! 



			
				Kavon said:
			
		

> Hmm.. You might want to bring the dpi back to 72, since that's all that a monitor's going to give anyway (make a print version and a website version, since for printing it does actually matter), that way the filesize will be decrease by a large leap. :3




I'll really drop the dpi down and do a test later tonight.



			
				Kavon said:
			
		

> Anyway, I don't know what it looks like (*is curious*), since when it was loading it it seemed to give my poor old computer a stroke, so I had to click "back" lots to save my poor computer's sanity (keep it from crashing) :3




Sorry about that dude! 

Edit.

By the way I just uploaded the Amilictli image in Grayscale/75dpi/75% its 299k I think. Let me know if thats any easier on your computer?


----------



## CRGreathouse

I have questions about the Anakim now.

1. The anakim has "damage reduction 20/epic, holy and piercing/slashing".  What does the last part mean -- only piercing and slashing weapons can get through, or only piercing or slashing weapons can get through?  The only weapons I can think of that have both P and S damage *at the same time* (unlike the dagger) are natural weapons: bite and claw.

2. The primary attack of the anakim is listed as a ranged weapon, but (unless I am very mistaken) uses Strength for attack rolls.  How does this work?  Is it related to the fact that it's an everdancing weapon?

3. What does this ability do?
*Legendary Strength (Ex):* The anakims strength is the stuff of legend. Their strength score is twice that of other abominations their size, and as a result gain +3 virtual size categories.

The Strength score is listed, so the first two clauses are purely explanitory, but what do the virtual size categories mean in play?  That is, what's not already factored into the stats?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey CRGreathouse dude! 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> I have questions about the Anakim now.




Fire away mate, by the way if you have any thoughts on the Amilictli feel free to email me.



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> 1. The anakim has "damage reduction 20/epic, holy and piercing/slashing".  What does the last part mean -- only piercing and slashing weapons can get through, or only piercing or slashing weapons can get through?  The only weapons I can think of that have both P and S damage *at the same time* (unlike the dagger) are natural weapons: bite and claw.




Its piercing OR slashing, I'll make the change next time I update...in fact I just did. I also noticed a discrepancy with its armour class that I have fixed.



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> 2. The primary attack of the anakim is listed as a ranged weapon, but (unless I am very mistaken) uses Strength for attack rolls.  How does this work?  Is it related to the fact that it's an everdancing weapon?




Yes.



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> 3. What does this ability do?
> *Legendary Strength (Ex):* The anakims strength is the stuff of legend. Their strength score is twice that of other abominations their size, and as a result gain +3 virtual size categories.




Virtual size categories are explained at the start of the Bestiary. Sufficed to say the main benefit is that its physical attacks are treated as if +3 size categories for the purposes of dealing base damage.



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> The Strength score is listed, so the first two clauses are purely explanitory, but what do the virtual size categories mean in play?  That is, what's not already factored into the stats?




I think I have it all covered in the stats, so I'll just delete that reference to avoid confusion. Legendary strength is mentioned because the anakim breaks with the abomination stats outline in the ELH.


----------



## Samuel Leming

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> The stats for the Anakim (Silent One) are now on the website.




Hmmmm. You may consider giving the Anakim the ability of not needing to breath.

Something this dense wouldn't be able to swim.

Sam


----------



## CRGreathouse

Samuel Leming said:
			
		

> Hmmmm. You may consider giving the Anakim the ability of not needing to breath.
> 
> Something this dense wouldn't be able to swim.




At a quick calculation, they're about two dozn times denser than lead.


----------



## Anabstercorian

"Rock to mud!" And the Anakim sinks so fast it makes a small explosion!  "Mud to rock!" And the Anakim inhales, causing the rock to explode violently!  Everywhere there are explosions when an Anakim is about!


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hi all! 

Okay I just added the art for the Anakim (Silent One).

Looking back I am not happy with the hands. In an ideal world I may do this again (although any such notions will have to wait until everything else is finished obviously).

Let me know what you think?


----------



## Knight Otu

You forgot the IH before the preview in your link. 
As for the art, it might be just my monitor, but it seems something strange is going on with the creature's arm and knee at the right. I'd expect the arm to be in front of most every part of the body, but apparently, the knee (which seems as if it should be farther away) is closer to the "camera" than the arm.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hi Knight Otu mate! 



			
				Knight Otu said:
			
		

> You forgot the IH before the preview in your link.




Thanks, just fixed it.



			
				Knight Otu said:
			
		

> As for the art, it might be just my monitor, but it seems something strange is going on with the creature's arm and knee at the right. I'd expect the arm to be in front of most every part of the body, but apparently, the knee (which seems as if it should be farther away) is closer to the "camera" than the arm.




The creature is (suposedly) charging forward, about to deliver a punch with its right arm, it may look slightly confusing because you can't see all its left leg.

The problem I have with the image (says Krusty shooting himself in the foot) is that its hands are too big. They are more or less in proportion, when they should really be small in comparison to the physique, to emphasize the muscles.

In my original sketch notes I had planned this elaborate head to the spiked chain that had elements of a dragons head, but I sort of had a crisis of confidence as to whether I could pull it off so I opted for the safe choice.


----------



## andargor

Great work. A minor nitpick on the amilictli: _greater dispelling_ should be changed to _greater dispel magic_. I assume it's being written for 3.5, looking at the stat block.

So, when's the Grimoire? Or should I be using my variant epic spellcasting rules for a while yet? 

Andargor


----------



## CRGreathouse

andargor said:
			
		

> So, when's the Grimoire? Or should I be using my variant epic spellcasting rules for a while yet?




By the bets we've gotten to my little contest, I'd say not until mid-2006 at the earliest.


(Introduction for those unfamiliar with the contest)

As you may know, I've been holding something of a betting pool for the release dates of Upper_Krust's books.  The rules are simple: guess a date no one else has chosen for one of the categories listed below, and 'ante up' with your choice of prize (or prizes), which I will assign to categories on an as-needed basis.

The prizes are great -- some of them don't even have curses!  Take the _deck of many things_ as an example: over a quarter of the cards have some beneficial aspect to them!  Admittedly, it's not the 1/2 you'd expect in such a deck, but that's life for you.

Bestiary 0.5:
2005-01-16: Rulemaster (January 16th)
2005-01-17: Fieari (January 17th)
2005-01-18: Anabstercorian (January 18th)
2005-01-31: CRGreathouse (January 31st)
2005-02-01: Fieari (February 1st)
2005-02-16: Baronovan (February 16th)
2005-02-17: Rulemaster ("in one month")

Current prizes: A _+2 halberd_ (ages wielder 1d4 hours every time he hits), the deed to land in a far-off country (overrun with invading hobgoblins), a _deck of many things_ with mostly baleful cards, and a retributive staff (no other powers).

Bestiary (PDF):
2005-03-01: Kalanyr (March 1st)
2005-03-20: Baronovan (March 20th)
2005-05-31: Fieari (May 31st)
2005-07-01: Anabstercorian ("summer 2005")
2005-08-15: CRGreathouse (August 15th)

Current prizes: A _greatsword of great cleaving_ that hits friends if enemies aren't around, everyone's favorite extradimensional bag filled with nuts, and the worst 2000 gp item in the DMG.

Bestiary (print):

Apotheosis (PDF):
2005-11-10: Baronovan ("Fall '05")

Current prizes: A _heavenly teamaker_.

Apotheosis (print):


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hi all! 

I just updated the website. Only some more art...I don't want to keep giving away the stats.  

I'll update one pic (or maybe two) a day just to keep the updates coming.

...forgot to provide the link. Here is the Gibborim (Mighty One). Let me know what you think?


----------



## Knight Otu

That's an ... interesting one.

Not even a single mechanics teaser?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hiya mate! 



			
				Knight Otu said:
			
		

> That's an ... interesting one.
> 
> Not even a single mechanics teaser?




...well it has *HD: 65d8+2080 (2600hp)*, hows that? Don't even think about getting me to tell you about its vacuum breath weapon that sucks you into the dismal demiplane that is its stomach.


----------



## Knight Otu

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Hiya mate!
> 
> 
> 
> ...well it has *HD: 65d8+2080 (2600hp)*, hows that?



... Ooooppsss.... 



			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Don't even think about getting me to tell you about its vacuum breath weapon that sucks you into the dismal demiplane that is its stomach.



Black hole elephant?


----------



## CRGreathouse

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> ...well it has *HD: 65d8+2080 (2600hp)*, hows that? Don't even think about getting me to tell you about its vacuum breath weapon that sucks you into the dismal demiplane that is its stomach.




Let's see... a 65-HD Outsider with Con 74 or 75 should have a Fort save of +66, or +68 if it has Great Fortitude.  Its vacuum breath weapon should have a DC of 74 (or 76 with Ability Focus), if it allows a save -- which I'd suppose it does.

Going off the previous trends, I'll estimate its CR at 128.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey andargor! 

Sorry I missed this post earlier.   



			
				andargor said:
			
		

> Great work. A minor nitpick on the amilictli: _greater dispelling_ should be changed to _greater dispel magic_. I assume it's being written for 3.5, looking at the stat block.




Yes, and thanks. Although the stats on the website are pre-editing at this point, so there are bound to be a few minor mistakes. 



			
				andargor said:
			
		

> So, when's the Grimoire?




As soon as I can get the Bestiary, Apotheosis and then the Grimoire finished.



			
				andargor said:
			
		

> Or should I be using my variant epic spellcasting rules for a while yet?




I can't see the Grimoire being available before end of March/beginning of April at the earliest.

Hey CRGreathouse dude! 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> Let's see... a 65-HD Outsider with Con 74 or 75




74, it has double the maximum listed Constitution score for what is a gargantuan abomination.



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> should have a Fort save of +66, or +68 if it has Great Fortitude. Its vacuum breath weapon should have a DC of 74 (or 76 with Ability Focus), if it allows a save -- which I'd suppose it does.




Yes. At the moment you get a reflex save to avoid the vacuum, and you can make a strength check to resist being sucked up.



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> Going off the previous trends, I'll estimate its CR at 128.




I'm eyeballing CR 65 (WotC), although thats a quick estimate. Being swallowed doesn't actually kill you, although its not the fondest of demiplanes.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Yes, and thanks. Although the stats on the website are pre-editing at this point, so there are bound to be a few minor mistakes.




Do you have an editor lined up?  I hope you're not planning on doing that on your own; that'll make for even more delays.


----------



## Anabstercorian

Get John Cooper to do it!


----------



## DarkElven

Hey U_K!
I figured it was a good time to drop my nigh on two year lurker status from all mediums of internet communication to once again make contact with you.
I'm STILL here!
And I want to remind you that I'm still around waiting oh so impatiently for your releases! 
So what are you doing reading this? Get back to work! You lucky devil, keeping it all to yourself   

Anyway I hope life is going well for you, (or at least better than it is for me now that my home was destroyed   ) and that you'll soon be able to unveil to the world your magnum opus.

-DE


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey guys! 

CRGreathouse - I'll email you later on that one mate.

As for the website updates I thought maybe adding three or four pics every few days might be better than adding one per day. So I'll be updating those either tonight or tomorrow.



			
				DarkElven said:
			
		

> Hey U_K!




Hey Dark Elven matey! 



			
				DarkElven said:
			
		

> I figured it was a good time to drop my nigh on two year lurker status from all mediums of internet communication to once again make contact with you.




Nice to hear from you dude!



			
				DarkElven said:
			
		

> I'm STILL here!




Glad to hear it! 



			
				DarkElven said:
			
		

> And I want to remind you that I'm still around waiting oh so impatiently for your releases!




You are not the only one.   



			
				DarkElven said:
			
		

> So what are you doing reading this? Get back to work! You lucky devil, keeping it all to yourself




Indeed. 



			
				DarkElven said:
			
		

> Anyway I hope life is going well for you, (or at least better than it is for me now that my home was destroyed   )




I trust no one was hurt mate!?



			
				DarkElven said:
			
		

> and that you'll soon be able to unveil to the world your magnum opus.




I hope so too.


----------



## CRGreathouse

U_K: What's the monster type breakdown of the Bestiary?  I was looking over the list you posted on your site, and here's what it looks like to me.

Construct: 5 (diamond golem, force golem, mercury golem, neutronium golem, orichalcum golem)
Dragon: 7 (adamantite, cometary, mithril, nexus, polychromatic, timber, void)
Elemental: 2 (quintessence, unelemental)
Giant: 1 (garganaut)
Magical Beast: 2 (kulshedra, lernean)
Ooze: 1 (prismatic pudding)
Outsider: 31 (5 abominations, 6 angels, 1 brood, 1 daemon, 1 demon, 1 devil, 4 HotA, 4 intelligibles, 6 umbrals, grigori, lipika)
Undead: 1 (seiriel)

Just Can't Guess: 11 (cogent, gog & magog, infinitaur, ketab, kranger, menhir, parikas, quinanes, stargoyle, trithemian, zymbear)

In particular:
* Have I left any types out that you have in the IH (aberration, animal, fey, humanoid, monstrous humanoid, plant, vermin)?
* Have I misguessed any of these?


----------



## Campbell

Greetings Krust,

I have a quick question: Does the epic spellcasting variant in the Grimoire use skill ranks? I'm asking because with the homebrew setting that I'm planning on running in the near future I've gone with a more primal take on magic,using only sorcerers and a slightly modified version of spontaneous spellcasting clerics, and the core skill-based form of epic spellcasting doesn't support what I'm trying to accomplish. One thought is to simply use a special spellcaster level ceck of the form 1d20+spellcaster level+spellcasting attribute bonus.

Additionally, would it be possible to start another thread for discussion of your CR/EL rules.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Was just about to email you dude! 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> U_K: What's the monster type breakdown of the Bestiary?




I'll add the type breakdown to the website at the weekend.



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> I was looking over the list you posted on your site, and here's what it looks like to me.




Construct: 5 (diamond golem, force golem, mercury golem, neutronium golem, orichalcum golem)

...and Ioun Golem (Construct, Swarm)

Dragon: 7 (adamantite, cometary, mithril, nexus, polychromatic, timber, void)

The Nexus Dragon is being dropped for now (replaced with the Ioun Golem).

Elemental: 2 (quintessence, unelemental) - Yep.

Giant: 1 (garganaut)

This one may be removed (and replaced with an aberration called Akishra - Astral Worm) and saved for another time.

Magical Beast: 2 kulshedra - yes

lernean - monstrous humanoid/shapechanger

Ooze: 1 (prismatic pudding) - yep.

Outsider: 31 (5 abominations, 6 angels, 1 brood, 1 daemon, 1 demon, 1 devil, 4 HotA, 4 intelligibles, 6 umbrals, grigori, lipika)

Umbrals are Undead (Think Nightshades crossed with Umbral Blots).

Undead: 1 (seiriel) - Yes.

Just Can't Guess: 11

cogent - Aberration.

gog & magog - Elemental

infinitaur - Outsider

keteb - Fey

kranger - Aberration

menhir - Outsider

parikas - Fey

quinanes - Magical Beast

stargoyle - Outsider

trithemian - Outsider

zymbear - construct/undead



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> In particular:
> * Have I left any types out that you have in the IH (aberration, animal, fey, humanoid, monstrous humanoid, plant, vermin)?
> * Have I misguessed any of these?




See above.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Campbell said:
			
		

> Greetings Krust,




Hey Campbell mate! 



			
				Campbell said:
			
		

> I have a quick question: Does the epic spellcasting variant in the Grimoire use skill ranks?




No.



			
				Campbell said:
			
		

> I'm asking because with the homebrew setting that I'm planning on running in the near future I've gone with a more primal take on magic, using only sorcerers and a slightly modified version of spontaneous spellcasting clerics, and the core skill-based form of epic spellcasting doesn't support what I'm trying to accomplish.




The system in the Grimoire, on the surface resembles the metamagic system, but you can cast 10th+ level magic even before 20th-level. Elements akin to the mitigating factors in the ELH are used (in a far simpler way I have deduced) to allow you to increase a spells power.


----------



## Campbell

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Hey Campbell mate!
> 
> The system in the Grimoire, on the surface resembles the metamagic system, but you can cast 10th+ level magic even before 20th-level. Elements akin to the mitigating factors in the ELH are used (in a far simpler way I have deduced) to allow you to increase a spells power.




Hey, Krust!

Consider this a preorder for the Grimoire. I'm fairly intrigued, and I look forward to seeing how completely new spells are developed when I get my grubby virtual hands on your Grimoire. Honestly, of the three documents I've always been looking forward to the Grimoire the most.


----------



## Zoatebix

Campbell said:
			
		

> Additionally, would it be possible to start another thread for discussion of your CR/EL rules.



Hmmm the old one is rather unwieldy, isn't it...

But if it started up again, and if I started using the design parameters to make classes (not what the document was designed for, but it's still a great aid), I'd feel bad about pestering U_K with questions.


----------



## Campbell

Zoatebix said:
			
		

> Hmmm the old one is rather unwieldy, isn't it...
> 
> But if it started up again, and if I started using the design parameters to make classes (not what the document was designed for, but it's still a great aid), I'd feel bad about pestering U_K with questions.




While I don't want to pull UK away from his work either, the main reason I asked about a new thread seperate from this one was to prevent clogging up this one with CR/EL discussion.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Bestiary 0.5:
2005-01-16: Rulemaster (January 16th)
2005-01-17: Fieari (January 17th)
2005-01-18: Anabstercorian (January 18th)
2005-01-31: CRGreathouse (January 31st)
2005-02-01: Fieari (February 1st)
2005-02-16: Baronovan (February 16th)
2005-02-17: Rulemaster ("in one month")

Current prizes: A _+2 halberd_ (ages wielder 1d4 hours every time he hits), the deed to land in a far-off country (overrun with invading hobgoblins), a _deck of many things_ with mostly baleful cards, and a retributive staff (no other powers).

Bestiary (PDF):
2005-03-01: Kalanyr (March 1st)
2005-03-20: Baronovan (March 20th)
2005-05-31: Fieari (May 31st)
2005-07-01: Anabstercorian ("summer 2005")
2005-08-15: CRGreathouse (August 15th)

Current prizes: A _greatsword of great cleaving_ that hits friends if enemies aren't around, everyone's favorite extradimensional bag filled with nuts, and the worst 2000 gp item in the DMG.

Bestiary (print):

Apotheosis (PDF):
2005-11-10: Baronovan ("Fall '05")

Current prizes: A _heavenly teamaker_.

Apotheosis (print):


----------



## Aquarius Alodar

*blast of silver fire*

Well met, all. In my travels through this 'World Wide Web' of yours. I have noted that the main room,or 'forums' if you must name these things thus, of the 'website' associated with the portions of this glorious tome appear to be long overdue in, as you wouuld put it 'installation'. Therefore,Archmage Krust, what befalls? A simple lack of funds (as must we all suffer) or something of more concern- a scattering of the memories, belike? 


*raging, swirling torrent of silver fire...which abruptly fades away*


----------



## Upper_Krust

Aquarius Alodar said:
			
		

> Well met, all.




Hey there Aquarius Alodar! 



			
				Aquarius Alodar said:
			
		

> In my travels through this 'World Wide Web' of yours. I have noted that the main room, or 'forums' if you must name these things thus, of the 'website' associated with the portions of this glorious tome appear to be long overdue in, as you wouuld put it 'installation'. Therefore, Archmage Krust, what befalls? A simple lack of funds (as must we all suffer) or something of more concern- a scattering of the memories, belike?




I don't have the means (ie. credit card) to add a forum at this point. I don't have the influx of cash to justify a credit card at this point. Therefore the forums will have to wait until such time that I do.

So its nothing personal.


----------



## Anabstercorian

_FINiSH THe FREAKiNG BEASTiARY!_


----------



## Aquarius Alodar

Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> _FINiSH THe FREAKiNG BEASTiARY!_





And WTH for.......so you can use its contents in some game of yours that needs them, unless I'm grossly mistaken.


Anyway.............methinks this needs bumpage.


----------



## Aquarius Alodar

And again, bump.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Aquarius Alodar said:
			
		

> And again, bump.




Hey Aquarius Alodar! 

I appreciate the love, but I don't think its fair to other threads for people to bump this one just for the sake of bumping it.

I'm working hard and I'll have some announcements to make fairly soon.


----------



## Aquarius Alodar

Ah,*heh-heh*, sorry 'bout that, mate........it's just that the sound of silence 'round here is getting to be a bit bloody deafening,y'know? Hope you're keeping well,stress aside......Aquarius out.


----------



## CRGreathouse

CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> Bestiary 0.5:
> 2005-01-16: Rulemaster (January 16th)
> 2005-01-17: Fieari (January 17th)
> 2005-01-18: Anabstercorian (January 18th)
> 2005-01-31: CRGreathouse (January 31st)
> 2005-02-01: Fieari (February 1st)
> 2005-02-16: Baronovan (February 16th)
> 2005-02-17: Rulemaster ("in one month")
> 
> Current prizes: A _+2 halberd_ (ages wielder 1d4 hours every time he hits), the deed to land in a far-off country (overrun with invading hobgoblins), a _deck of many things_ with mostly baleful cards, and a retributive staff (no other powers).
> 
> Bestiary (PDF):
> 2005-03-01: Kalanyr (March 1st)
> 2005-03-20: Baronovan (March 20th)
> 2005-05-31: Fieari (May 31st)
> 2005-07-01: Anabstercorian ("summer 2005")
> 2005-08-15: CRGreathouse (August 15th)
> 
> Current prizes: A _greatsword of great cleaving_ that hits friends if enemies aren't around, everyone's favorite extradimensional bag filled with nuts, and the worst 2000 gp item in the DMG.
> 
> Bestiary (print):
> 
> Apotheosis (PDF):
> 2005-11-10: Baronovan ("Fall '05")
> 
> Current prizes: A _heavenly teamaker_.
> 
> Apotheosis (print):





Well, with only one contestant left for the first competition, should I just award the prizes?


----------



## Baronovan

Not to nit-pick, but uh... no wins via ambiguity.


----------



## Fieari

You know, technically, "In one month" whould have expired earlier than Feb 16, making Baronovan the actual winner, since his selection is the closest as long as it is actually released at some point in the future ever.


----------



## Verequus

Fieari said:
			
		

> You know, technically, "In one month" whould have expired earlier than Feb 16, making Baronovan the actual winner, since his selection is the closest as long as it is actually released at some point in the future ever.




How do you count "in one month"? 28 days? Equally valid as "increase the month by one", but isn't it a bit late to discuss that now - or the rules of this game in general after it has ended? Since the interpretation of CRGreathouse you had time to voice your concern, but you didn't - and no one else did object the tieing of the relative term to one fixed date, which is necessary to determine the winner unambigously.

I find it a bit unfair that this discussion has to be held now, especially, because I am automatically viewed as biased due being one of the potential winners. The fairest in this situation would be probably: If you don't like the current rules, change them for the next game, but not afterwards.


----------



## Aquarius Alodar

Oh dear- methinks we should get a mod down here to sticky this untill _something_ is released. In the meantime, Bump to keep it where it belongs- up front.


----------



## Baronovan

UK just went over that to a degree... I hope the Amilictli and Anakim weren't the only ones he had done.


----------



## Aquarius Alodar

(_whistles_).....Off she went with a Bumpetty-*bump* .....(Yes, I know it isn't a very clever disguise for a bump, but anyway...)


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hi all! 

Sorry I've been dragging my heels. Had the flu (or at least a bad cold) this week. The U.K. and the U.K. have both been hit by cold spells this week it seems. 

I'm almost finished with the bestiary (preview yes).

I just want to ask Aquarius Alodar to please STOP bumping this thread. I fully appreciate the interest, but I did ask you before, I'm asking again. Please don't make me repeat myself a third time.

Not only is bumping disrespectful to other threads, it also has the added annoyance of ballooning this thread unnecessarily with useless posts that serve no purpose. 

DON'T reply to this post of mine. DON'T post wishing me a fast recovery (I'm a big boy, its just a cold I'll be okay by tomorrow). This thread is for IMMORTALS HANDBOOK questions. If you want to talk to me personally you all can find my email on the website. This thread doesn't need bumped, I don't want it bumped, so don't bump it.

If you have a legitimate question, or advice then I'm happy enough to reply. But I don't care if this thread sinks to the second page. I'm sure once I get the preview finished and out there we'll have lots to talk about. Until that time its okay to just let this slide.

Thanks all for the continued support.


----------



## Goobermunch

> The creature wears only a loin cloth to hide its modesty, though a huge black spiked chain orbits its body like some unholy flying serpent hunting for prey.




I think this should read "The creature wears only a loin cloth to protect its modesty, though a huge black spiked chain orbits its body like some unholy flying serpent hunting for prey."

I mean, if it's hiding its modesty, then it's showing the whole biz, isn't it?

--G


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Goobermunch! 



			
				Goobermunch said:
			
		

> I think this should read "The creature wears only a loin cloth to protect its modesty, though a huge black spiked chain orbits its body like some unholy flying serpent hunting for prey."
> 
> I mean, if it's hiding its modesty, then it's showing the whole biz, isn't it?




As far as I can tell (and I may well be wrong?) it would have no reason to be 'modest' unless it was naked. So the loin cloth hides its modesty. But I sort of see where you are coming from on that, its a touch confusing, I'll think about changing that sentence altogether.

Thanks for the help.


----------



## Zoatebix

Just in case you guys missed this on the front page - the CR/EL relationship pioneered by Upper_Krust for the Immortals Handbook has been put into a very elegant form by Bad Axe Games an is available for free for GM's day: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?p=2077536

Plus you can check out some of the history of this method (and some variations explained by Cheiromancer at the bottom of the page) by following a link I posted in said thread.


----------



## S'mon

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> As far as I can tell (and I may well be wrong?) it would have no reason to be 'modest' unless it was naked. So the loin cloth hides its modesty. But I sort of see where you are coming from on that, its a touch confusing, I'll think about changing that sentence altogether.




How about "To cover its penis?"


----------



## Upper_Krust

Thanks for the support Zoatebix! 

Hey S'mon! 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> How about "To cover its penis?"




Dirty boy. 

Its the Immortals Handbook, not the Hornballs Handbook.


----------



## S'mon

Only trying to help...


----------



## Fieari

So, S'mon...

What DO you give a PC that has everything, anyway?


----------



## S'mon

Fieari said:
			
		

> So, S'mon...
> 
> What DO you give a PC that has everything, anyway?




This turns out to be a much harder question than first anticipated.... 

I think my answer though boils down to though is that beyond the geegaws & XP, what matters is "Making a Difference" - the ability to create a lasting impact on the campaign world or (for deities) the Multiverse.  For me that's why published 3e high level scenarios like Bastion of Broken Souls seem so pointless, they take place within a hermetically-sealed bubble with no impact on the pre-established multiverse.  This contrasts with an OD&D Immortals scenario like Wrath of Olympus where the PCs' epoch-making actions can create a golden age of peace on Mystara, the _primary campaign world_ of the game!  The 1e AD&D 'Throne of Bloodstone' series stands somewhere between the two - killing Orcus & scratching him off the Monster Manual is nice, the campaign pretty much takes place in a vacuum - the lands detailed didn't exist before that campaign, which lessens its impact, though the published FR Bloodstone Lands pack letting you play on in liberated Damara is nice.  For deity PCs, I think the pure acquisition of treasure & XP per se rapidly becomes pointless, like a superhero comic with nothing but fights.  The PCs' actions need to have actual and long-term impact on the multiverse or they're not really worth playing through.

(Craig - you can post this & the post below to Immortalshandbook.com as my 'article', I may expand on it later).


----------



## S'mon

Example from our campaign:

At the climax of the original 'mortal' campaign, the now-quasi-deity PCs Thrin & the elf wizardess Darra faced off against 2 of Graz'zt's Chaos Champions (I think it was Raistlin the Archmage of Dragonlance fame & some quasi-deity Cleric woman, Ralkinsa Darkflame was her name I think) on the Plane of Concordant Opposition in a duel hosted by the Norns, a battle for the Orb of Albinus.  The Orb was a powerful artifact that enabled the user to summon _anyone_ in the multiverse.  Victorious, they forced Graz'zt (scared they'd use it on him - this was before Prince Graz'zt became King of Demons, he was quite beatable) to sue for peace and forged a non-aggression treaty ratified by the Norns (you don't want to break those).  This saved northern Ea from Graz'zt's demon armies.

Then they  (using the Caves of Ningauble) travelled to south Ea (incidentally also into their future), activated the summoning field and summoned Kolltirion, the evil Arch-Lich whose Red Wizards had conquered the Old Imarran Empire a century before.  They planned to assassinate him - what they didn't realise was that _he_ could now summon anyone too, and promptly summoned his goddess, Hel!  Darra summoned her own goddess Isis, who wasn't too pleased to find herself facing off against a very annoyed Hel!  They then collapsed the summoning field so they could escape this mess, not realising that to maintain its power the Orb would absorb & destroy the soul of one of the summoners within it.  I remember rolling a d6 - 1-2 Thrin (summoned Kolltirion), 3-4 Darra (summoned Isis) and 5-6 Kolltirion (summoned Hel).  Rolled a 5.  

The PCs escaped, Kolltirion was dead, throwing his evil empire into chaos and eventually leading to its defeat in the Albine-Thrinian invasion 17 years later.  Furthermore the two new godlings had just won themselves the lifelong hatred of Hel - and Hel lives a _very_ long time...


----------



## Limper

You are *STILL* working on this!!!!!! You must be up to 10,000+ pages of text by now.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Limper! 



			
				Limper said:
			
		

> You are *STILL* working on this!!!!!! You must be up to 10,000+ pages of text by now.




I actually have more than 10,000 pages of notes I think.


----------



## Anabstercorian

UK, finish the freaking beastiary (Whole thing, not just the 1/2 preview) by May or I won't buy it, or anything else you ever produce.


----------



## S'mon

BTW everyone, check out immortalshandbook.com for UK's commentary on my mini-article above.


----------



## Baronovan

Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> UK, finish the freaking beastiary (Whole thing, not just the 1/2 preview) by May or I won't buy it, or anything else you ever produce.



A heavy statement... 
U_K, any idea how close are you to finishing the Bestiary? I.e. can you give us a page ratio or a prospective number of days? It has been over a year... even my Eldar work is going faster than this, and I had to make 40 Elda deities; that's not counting Melkor, Sauron, all their lackeys, the few Aratar and Valar that I made, or the Atani (about 3/5 done). 
Well, good luck, God-speed, et al. We're all dying to see your work, so let us know what to expect.


----------



## Anabstercorian

He has two months.  If he can't finish it by then, then I'm not investing in vaporware.


----------



## Verequus

Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> He has two months.  If he can't finish it by then, then I'm not investing in vaporware.




Unfortunately, U_K can't access ENWorld - it seems, that he has become a victim of this bug: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=124395 Because of this, he asked me to post this:



			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Anabstercorian, I understand your frustration and I'll try my hardest to get it finished as soon as possible.


----------



## CRGreathouse

*Passing the time...*

Let's come up with stats for some of the Bestiary monsters while we're waiting for it to come out.  If nothing else, we could come up with some useable abilities to create new monsters with, right?

Should we start at the beginning (perhaps with the Gibborim (Mighty One), since it's illustrated), or at the end (so we won't have overklap from the Bestiary preview)?


----------



## Anabstercorian

Oh, let's come up with something new and interesting.  I don't think I ever talked UK in to adding the Mobiatrius, the creature that is never born and never dies but simply loops through time, experiencing the same life an infinite number of times.  That could be fun.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey all! 

As of today, things seem to be working again. 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> U_K, any idea how close are you to finishing the Bestiary? I.e. can you give us a page ratio or a prospective number of days?




I'll have the text for the Bestiary preview finished on Monday. Then it will be edited (a few days presumably). During that time I'll finish off the art which still needs done.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> It has been over a year... even my Eldar work is going faster than this, and I had to make 40 Elda deities; that's not counting Melkor, Sauron, all their lackeys, the few Aratar and Valar that I made, or the Atani (about 3/5 done).




I don't want to dwell on it but I've had a few problems working from home that I should (fingers crossed) shortly be able to correct. After that things will go much quicker in future.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Well, good luck, God-speed, et al. We're all dying to see your work, so let us know what to expect.




I appreciate the support mate.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Anabstercorian mate! 



			
				Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> He has two months.  If he can't finish it by then, then I'm not investing in vaporware.




Well obviously I'm trying to get things finished as soon as possible. However I don't recall asking anyone to invest any money (as yet). In fact I seem to recall specifically turning down the idea of pre-orders. Everything else I have done (the numerous incarnations of the CR/EL system, the monsters on the website etc.) has all been free. 

So while I appreciate your frustration at my prolonged procrastination I don't think its fair to say that I have actually asked you (or anyone else) to invest anything at this stage. Quite the opposite in fact, it is I who have invested in you*.

*that being a general 'you', not simply you Anabstercorian.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hello again! 



			
				Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> Oh, let's come up with something new and interesting.  I don't think I ever talked UK in to adding the Mobiatrius, the creature that is never born and never dies but simply loops through time, experiencing the same life an infinite number of times.  That could be fun.




Interesting monster idea. 

I wonder what would happen if we added the Atata (Time Tortured Creature) Template to the Mobiatrius? An Atata is an immortal (creature, deity etc.) that has been tortured for (what seems like) an eternity using temporal magic.

The idea came from an episode of Deep Space Nine where Chief O'Brien is incarcerated for what he thinks is 20 years, but its really only 20 hours (or something like that). He is released and is naturally somewhat unhinged by the experience.


----------



## Baronovan

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> I don't want to dwell on it but I've had a few problems working from home that I should (fingers crossed) shortly be able to correct. After that things will go much quicker in future.




So, you finally got your own PHB?  Good to hear from you, and I'm glad to know things are straightened out.


----------



## Anabstercorian

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Hello again!
> 
> Interesting monster idea.
> 
> I wonder what would happen if we added the Atata (Time Tortured Creature) Template to the Mobiatrius? An Atata is an immortal (creature, deity etc.) that has been tortured for (what seems like) an eternity using temporal magic.
> 
> The idea came from an episode of Deep Space Nine where Chief O'Brien is incarcerated for what he thinks is 20 years, but its really only 20 hours (or something like that). He is released and is naturally somewhat unhinged by the experience.




Hmmm.  Well, a Mobiatrius would basically have a set memory - everything that has happened to it, it remembers, and everything that WILL happen to it, HAS happened to it.  As a result, I don't know if it could ever advance, per se, or have a template applied to it - though I suppose it could run through a cycle of power at different stages of his existence.

Anyway, I don't think it would be too much different - it would just be another poor jerk who had spent every bit of existence he could remember clearly being tortured.  You could probably apply the template without difficulty.

In fact, it could conceivably be the case that ALL Mobiatrius were Atata early in their existence-cycle.  The only way to get from the end of the universe to the beginning again is to step through a timelike infinity of blinding horror - over and over and over...


----------



## Verequus

Hi UK!

I'm helping Roman in this thread with upping the core races, but with  "In the Hands of the Earth"-ability I'm beyound my wisdom. Maybe you could shed some light on it - and on some other questions.


----------



## Impeesa

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Interesting monster idea.
> 
> I wonder what would happen if we added the Atata (Time Tortured Creature) Template to the Mobiatrius? An Atata is an immortal (creature, deity etc.) that has been tortured for (what seems like) an eternity using temporal magic.
> 
> The idea came from an episode of Deep Space Nine where Chief O'Brien is incarcerated for what he thinks is 20 years, but its really only 20 hours (or something like that). He is released and is naturally somewhat unhinged by the experience.




Interesting. I've had ideas similar to both of those in execution, but very different in inspiration. The first was actually going to be more of a plot device in a hybrid Chrono Trigger-style Midnight game. The god of time was going to be reliving the entire timeline from the distant past up to the effective end of the world over and over again, looking for a way to prevent things from turning out that way. Eventually he would settle on the PCs to be groomed for the role of saviours.

The other was a spell that a caster would use voluntarily. Like a super-extended time stop, except the extra time could only be used to think (being spent entirely inside the caster's mind). Using it for a short virtual duration would allow bonuses to certain skills and the like, since the caster can pontificate on every angle for as long as he likes. Using it for longer durations would provide greater insights but threaten the caster's mental health. 

--Impeesa--


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Baranovan mate! 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> So, you finally got your own PHB?  Good to hear from you, and I'm glad to know things are straightened out.




Cheeky! 

Its actually to do with moving my computer into some office space away from distractions.

Hiya Anabstercorian dude! 



			
				Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> Hmmm. Well, a Mobiatrius would basically have a set memory - everything that has happened to it, it remembers, and everything that WILL happen to it, HAS happened to it. As a result, I don't know if it could ever advance, per se, or have a template applied to it - though I suppose it could run through a cycle of power at different stages of his existence.
> 
> Anyway, I don't think it would be too much different - it would just be another poor jerk who had spent every bit of existence he could remember clearly being tortured. You could probably apply the template without difficulty.
> 
> In fact, it could conceivably be the case that ALL Mobiatrius were Atata early in their existence-cycle. The only way to get from the end of the universe to the beginning again is to step through a timelike infinity of blinding horror - over and over and over...




I have a monster power (used in another monster not the Atata) called Mind Set that makes you repeat your actions over and over again...your bit about its set memory reminded me of that.

Also I was thinking of another time based monster that travels backwards through time - maybe related to the Ouzelum Bird.

Hi Impeesa matey! 



			
				Impeesa said:
			
		

> Interesting. I've had ideas similar to both of those in execution, but very different in inspiration. The first was actually going to be more of a plot device in a hybrid Chrono Trigger-style Midnight game. The god of time was going to be reliving the entire timeline from the distant past up to the effective end of the world over and over again, looking for a way to prevent things from turning out that way. Eventually he would settle on the PCs to be groomed for the role of saviours.
> 
> The other was a spell that a caster would use voluntarily. Like a super-extended time stop, except the extra time could only be used to think (being spent entirely inside the caster's mind). Using it for a short virtual duration would allow bonuses to certain skills and the like, since the caster can pontificate on every angle for as long as he likes. Using it for longer durations would provide greater insights but threaten the caster's mental health.




That would be interesting in conjunction with my temporal magic - where you expend time to increase the power of your magic.


----------



## Fieari

Krust, will the really big dragons be in the preview?  Because I'll be having a need for one in the upcomming weeks... something capable of devouring a planet at the least.


----------



## Aquarius Alodar

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> temporal magic - where you expend time to increase the power of your magic.





Ah, I'm not entirely clear on what 'expending time' is - my first impression was of a wizard or sorcerer increasing temporal-based entropy to power his works, objects (and evantually, creatures) falling into heaps of dust, the years sucked out of them.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Fieari mate! 



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> Krust, will the really big dragons be in the preview?  Because I'll be having a need for one in the upcomming weeks... something capable of devouring a planet at the least.




I'm redefining what BIG really means when applied to dragons.

I have Adamantite Dragons (Great Wyrm 95 HD; Titanic), Cometary Dragons (Great Wyrm 248; Macro-Fine), Mithril Dragons (Great Wyrm 95 HD; Titanic), Polychromatic Dragons (Great Wyrm 86 HD; Titanic), Timber Dragons (Great Wyrm 92 HD; Titanic) and Void Dragons (Great Wyrm 260 HD; Macro-Fine).

By the way I changed the progression of epic dragons from +5 HD to +6 HD/age category. It makes everything fit far better.

I also have a 2 page feature on dragons, that better explains what epic dragons are, explains adamic dragons (the ones above epic), and hints at Nehashimic Dragons (the ones above Adamic). This feature also includes rules on how to build your own dragons: True; Epic and Adamic.

I was going to include the Nehaschimic Dragons with the Nexus Dragon example. But it was too big at this stage and meant revealing some of the Time Lord abilities before I had even explained Time Lords, which I wasn't ready to do just yet.

Hey Aquarius Alodar dude! 



			
				Aquarius Alodar said:
			
		

> Ah, I'm not entirely clear on what 'expending time' is - my first impression was of a wizard or sorcerer increasing temporal-based entropy to power his works, objects (and evantually, creatures) falling into heaps of dust, the years sucked out of them.




Well it can be as simple as increasing the casting time, or you can combine it with entropic magic and voluntarily age yourself for more impressive results.


----------



## historian

Hello U_K.

Hope all is well.  

Quick question -- how do (or would) you classify/handle the "Force"from Star Wars and is it something you plan to handle in the IH?  

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Upper_Krust

historian said:
			
		

> Hello U_K.




Hi historian mate! 



			
				historian said:
			
		

> Hope all is well.




The usual.



			
				historian said:
			
		

> Quick question -- how do (or would) you classify/handle the "Force"from Star Wars




It seems treating it as psionics would be the logical choice.



			
				historian said:
			
		

> and is it something you plan to handle in the IH?




Well I still have the bones of a psi-based web enhancement here. But that will have to wait until after Apotheosis is released. 



			
				historian said:
			
		

> Thanks in advance.




Anytime mate.


----------



## Zoatebix

I think Historian might have been asking about the common belief/depiction in Star Wars of the Force having a will or consciousness or goals of it's own, and the fact that there's a "Hokey Religion" or two built up around it...


----------



## Dark Wolf 97

Hi Upper Krust!

Sadly my birthday has come and gone with the Immortal's Handbook, but I still have faith!   

I am desperatly needing the IH. My players are epic and well on the way to the divine, and soon I will have need of a Titan, something to challenge a number of powerful gods. A question- will the Titans be included in the beastiary (preview?) or another part of the handbook?

Later


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Zoatebix dude! 



			
				Zoatebix said:
			
		

> I think Historian might have been asking about the common belief/depiction in Star Wars of the Force having a will or consciousness or goals of it's own, and the fact that there's a "Hokey Religion" or two built up around it...




Oh right...well in that case he might want to use the Proto-deity Limbus (who personifies Thought/Chaos).



			
				DarkWolf97 said:
			
		

> Hi Upper Krust!




Hi Dark Wolf matey! 



			
				DarkWolf97 said:
			
		

> Sadly my birthday has come and gone with the Immortal's Handbook, but I still have faith!




Happy birthday mate! Sorry I don't have things finished yet. 



			
				DarkWolf97 said:
			
		

> I am desperatly needing the IH. My players are epic and well on the way to the divine, and soon I will have need of a Titan, something to challenge a number of powerful gods. A question - will the Titans be included in the beastiary (preview?) or another part of the handbook?




Well you have the Amilictli of course...which you can see on the website.

There are Elder Titans in the Epic Level Handbook, so I didn't really see the need to do a generic epic/immortal Titan. Though I will of course have individual Titans and Gigantes in the Greek Mythology section of the Immortals Index.

There is a template in the Bestiary (full), called Macrobe which increases a creatures size a thousandfold. There are also quick templates in the Bestiary preview: Dire, Behemoth, Teratoid, Brobdingnagian which are size increases (of 1-4 categories).

Also four of the Golem entries have stats for six varieties - so you can have medium sized Diamond Guardians, Large Diamond Golems, Huge Diamond Sentinels, Gargantuan Diamond Gargants, Colossal Diamond Colossi and Titanic Diamond Leviathans. Each has some unique trait (like the Colossus Anti-Magic Field for instance).

However if you can give me a bit more on how powerful this Titan has to be (or the gods he has to challenge?) then I could probably find you a better fit.



			
				DarkWolf97 said:
			
		

> Later...




Take care dude.


----------



## Fieari

Just idle thoughts.  I want to follow S'mon's advice about having my epic players interacting and depending on very weak NPCs, and I thought of a method that might work.  What about a monster that has scaling AC and BAB based on his opponent at the time?

Say this monster has the special ability "Is not _automatically_ hit on a natural 20" and then AC equal to: 10 base + 5 natural + 2x Attacker's Attack Bonus  (or BAB, whichever is higher (incase of powerattack))

Look at how that works out:

Attack Bonus of 0 vs AC 15, hits on 16-20
Attack Bonus of 1 vs AC 17, hits on 17-20
Attack Bonus of 2 vs AC 19, hits on 18-20
Attack Bonus of 3 vs AC 21, hits on 19-20
Attack Bonus of 4 vs AC 23, hits only on nat 20
Attack Bonus of 4 or more... never hits.

Now then, give it magical immunity, and other things to resist high-level folks, and you have something that seems custom designed to harm the big guns.  The gods themselves can't harm this thing, and if you likewise make it so that its attack bonus is equal to 2x(Opponent's AC - 10) and bypasses all DR... you have something that can kill the gods themselves, and yet is vulnerable to a single level 1 warrior.

Now, obviously, if this critter has a huge amount of hit points, the level 1 warrior is -still- going to have some difficulty killing the nasty moster.  But that's where the epic guys come in.... guarding and helping the little dude survive, making sure that the little guy doesn't get too big, but making sure he isn't too small either.  An interesting challenge, no?  I guess there'd have to be some reason they can't just get an army of peasants as well...

What do you think?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Fieari mate! 



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> Just idle thoughts.  I want to follow S'mon's advice about having my epic players interacting and depending on very weak NPCs, and I thought of a method that might work.  What about a monster that has scaling AC and BAB based on his opponent at the time?
> 
> Say this monster has the special ability "Is not _automatically_ hit on a natural 20" and then AC equal to: 10 base + 5 natural + 2x Attacker's Attack Bonus  (or BAB, whichever is higher (incase of powerattack))
> 
> Look at how that works out:
> 
> Attack Bonus of 0 vs AC 15, hits on 16-20
> Attack Bonus of 1 vs AC 17, hits on 17-20
> Attack Bonus of 2 vs AC 19, hits on 18-20
> Attack Bonus of 3 vs AC 21, hits on 19-20
> Attack Bonus of 4 vs AC 23, hits only on nat 20
> Attack Bonus of 4 or more... never hits.
> 
> Now then, give it magical immunity, and other things to resist high-level folks, and you have something that seems custom designed to harm the big guns.  The gods themselves can't harm this thing, and if you likewise make it so that its attack bonus is equal to 2x(Opponent's AC - 10) and bypasses all DR... you have something that can kill the gods themselves, and yet is vulnerable to a single level 1 warrior.
> 
> Now, obviously, if this critter has a huge amount of hit points, the level 1 warrior is -still- going to have some difficulty killing the nasty moster.  But that's where the epic guys come in.... guarding and helping the little dude survive, making sure that the little guy doesn't get too big, but making sure he isn't too small either.  An interesting challenge, no?  I guess there'd have to be some reason they can't just get an army of peasants as well...
> 
> What do you think?




Very interesting. I like it, though there are a few things that need to be resolved. Such as what happens when two characters are fighting it at the same time. 

Two ways I can see would be to either make the monster a template that you apply to a duplicate of the PC, or make a monster to which you then add a makeshift template based on the PC its fighting...I actually have the latter in the Bestiary (Preview - the Akalich example has a major artifact which gives it the Supremacy power).

The first method could incorporate one of two ideas I have been working on. One makes the individual character and monster fight on a one to one basis (taking them into a pocket dimension, or the fight takes place solely in the characters mind). The second idea (which in a roundabout way is in the Bestiary Preview) creates a monster for every PC present...so everyone has to fight their own version (although the monsters hit points might well be shared as they are with the Diamond Golem).


----------



## Aquarius Alodar

OK, here I go opening my stupid (or perhaps just irrelevant?)mouth again...

Immortals Handbook site, last entry is on 12th March about the preview with 'announcements over the course of the week', nothing since then for a month now. So, the question is: Why so quiet?


----------



## Knight Otu

I'd hope he's working hard. 

That discussion on the time-tortured creature somewhat reminded me of a punishment in a sci-fi universe - infinite death penalty, where the victim is tortured to death, then revived, so long until the victim is beyond reviving, and truly dead.



> Very interesting. I like it, though there are a few things that need to be resolved. Such as what happens when two characters are fighting it at the same time.



I think I've delved into similar depth of thought as Fieari, as I want to use something similar - a deflection bonus to AC equal to half the attacker's BAB, and SR equal to 12-14 (not sure without my notes) plus the attackers' highest caster level. I actually think the easiest method is to say that the creature has multiple ACs, but in each situation, only one applies.


----------



## Baronovan

The Bestiary Preview is supposed to be finished, editing not included.


----------



## S'mon

Fieari said:
			
		

> Just idle thoughts.  I want to follow S'mon's advice about having my epic players interacting and depending on very weak NPCs, and I thought of a method that might work.  What about a monster that has scaling AC and BAB based on his opponent at the time?




Hi Fieari - I like your idea, although I was thinking more about interaction outside combat, of course.  It reminds me of a similar idea in the Slaine comic strip where the Cythrons draw power from the hate & other emotions of their foe, the stronger the foe, the faster they regenerate.  So lower-power Murdach could kill his Cythron much easier than higher-power Slaine.
IMC mortals used magic (eg vorpal battleaxe) or technology to even the odds when fighting deities, with realistic stats for rocket-propelled grenades and such they were a major threat to 399-hp deities.

Outside combat, in that Cyberpunk crossover game where Thrin was allied with Sledge & Dorie, his big foe was a mid-ranking Arasaka Corp exec Hiro Kinoshi, who in 3e terms would be a 4th level Expert.  Hiro commanded the vast resources of Arasaka Corp but was completely noncombatant, never carried a weapon, so LG Thrin couldn't just kill him, which made for some fun roleplay.  You can do the same in a fantasy setting - eg your good-aligned demigod PCs may have a political enemy who's a politician of the same city/country/empire they serve, someone with no combat ability but huge resources, a Cardinal Richelieu type.  Or they may have an ally who is important but with no physical power, anything from a young king to a child prophesied to be saviour, or a prophetess with no control over her visions, a Delphic Oracle type.  Give the NPC a personality, goals of their own, and a few (2-4) levels in an NPC class and they should work well.


----------



## Fieari

Yeah.  I can see all those things happening... but teaching my players how to play like that could be tricky.  Some of them have this idea that killing the opposition may be the best choice of what to do in any given situation, and I really want to train them out of that habit before I give them the really tremendous power (which I want to be able to do very very much).  So I was thinking to get them sympathising with the "lesser people" through something they respect-- combat.  So far, the only things they've ever been afraid or worried about has been stronger foes.  Heck... they murdered a duke's son and covered it up.  I need to get them respecting people and life in general... preferably without railroading.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey S'mon and Fieari! 



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> Yeah.  I can see all those things happening... but teaching my players how to play like that could be tricky.  Some of them have this idea that killing the opposition may be the best choice of what to do in any given situation, and I really want to train them out of that habit before I give them the really tremendous power (which I want to be able to do very very much).  So I was thinking to get them sympathising with the "lesser people" through something they respect-- combat.  So far, the only things they've ever been afraid or worried about has been stronger foes.  Heck... they murdered a duke's son and covered it up.  I need to get them respecting people and life in general... preferably without railroading.




This is where the worship points system really shines, because it means the DM perpetually has the players by the _cahones_, while at the same time not having to crush them to worry them...only squeeze.

Another factor is pantheon responsibility (and also portfolio responsibility - although thats a bit more black and white).

eg. If you lose the respect of your pantheon you they are less likely to bail you out of Hell when you get captured by a trio of archdevils...*ahem*.   

So you not only have to consider the physical repercussions of battles, but also the sociological repercussions of both your peers and your worshippers.

There have been many occasions whereby Thrin has had to circumvent the obvious (combat) to get the desired results. Or spend time maneouvering the opponent into a position where combat became an option.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey all! 



			
				Aquarius Alodar said:
			
		

> OK, here I go opening my stupid (or perhaps just irrelevant?) mouth again...
> 
> Immortals Handbook site, last entry is on 12th March about the preview with 'announcements over the course of the week', nothing since then for a month now. So, the question is: Why so quiet?




Probably because the best laid plans often go astray.

I will probably mention on the website when the preview is away for editing. Its very, very close to being finished but take that with a pinch of salt - this is me remember. Over the weekend I noticed I had made a balls up of the dragon ability scores which meant a ton of stat crunching had to be redone, which is just one amongst many comedy of errors that have dogged me. I'm not going to apologise anymore, I'm not going to speculate as to when it will be finished. When its finished, I'll be the first to let you all know. Mistakes will be learnt from and hopefully not repeated. Circumstances that have dogged progress since the beginning will be a thing of the past from the end of next week. So although things seem quagmired at the moment the future is bright.


----------



## Nifelhein

I just hope it comes in time for 4th edition. 

Just joking guys... I couldn't afford it anytime now too. keep the work going, keep the ideas flowing, give us your best, whenever that may be possible.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Nifelhein mate! 



			
				Nifelhein said:
			
		

> I just hope it comes in time for 4th edition.




He he! 



			
				Nifelhein said:
			
		

> Just joking guys... I couldn't afford it anytime now too. keep the work going, keep the ideas flowing, give us your best, whenever that may be possible.




I'm just going to circumvent one of the major stumbling blocks of the completion...in effect, Improved Spell Capacity. While innocent enough on the surface this dirty ******* has probably annoyed me more than any other facet of the Bestiary.

Spell lists for 133HD Cherubim with 66th-level cleric integrated spellcasting, 76 wisdom and 24 improved spell capacity feats are somewhat clunky under WotCs auspices.

So I am going to rig up a quick compromise (for the preview) and based on the response I'll see whether or not I retain it for the full Bestiary.

Essentially a rules-lite version of my magic system (without the frills of new types of magic).

Basically it takes the Improved Spell Capacity feat and changes it to a free metamagic slot (to avoid confusion with Improved Spell Capacity I may call this Metamagic Freedom).

So If I have 24 Metamagic Freedom feats, every spell I cast could be Heightened 24 times, or Empowered 12 times (x7 damage), or any combination of metamagic you want - based upon the metamagic feats you have (allowing metamagic to stack obviously).

The difference between this and I.S.C. is that you don't have to work out how many darn spells of each level above 9th you have - which is a bloody nightmare.

The trade off is that you have less total spells* (since I.S.C. gives you +1 spell and the chance for bonus spells due to very high ability scores). 

However, the benefit is twofold. Firstly that every spell you have benefits from the full metamagic effect (if required) for each spell - in contrast to the I.S.C. which is limiting.

eg. Here is the current Cherubim Spell Numeration:

6/15/14/14/14/14/12/12/12/12/*7/7/7/7/6/6/6/6/5/5/5/5/4/4/4/4/3/3/3/3/2/2/2/2*

Under the new regime that would become:

6/15/14/14/14/14/12/12/12/12

But instead of having x2 33rd-level spells, x2 32nd-level spells etc. You would have x12 33rd-level spells.

The second reason is that it doesn't make lower level spells obsolete. I mean, what deity is going to bother with 9th-level spells when they can cast 33rd-level spells. The choices become irrelevant. This way the actual 3rd-level spells you take (for instance) still mean something when you are 66th-level.

I just wasn't having any fun working out every individual levels spell-list, I'd much rather be working out favourite spells for the tactics sections. 

By the way, I don't like the idea of this stacking with Improved Metamagic, just to let you know. Also, technically it would replace multispell as well. Instead of multispell you just stack two quickened spells. etc.

Any comments?


----------



## poilbrun

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> I'm just going to circumvent one of the major stumbling blocks of the completion...in effect, Improved Spell Capacity. While innocent enough on the surface this dirty ******* has probably annoyed me more than any other facet of the Bestiary.
> 
> Spell lists for 133HD Cherubim with 66th-level cleric integrated spellcasting, 76 wisdom and 24 improved spell capacity feats are somewhat clunky under WotCs auspices.
> 
> So I am going to rig up a quick compromise (for the preview) and based on the response I'll see whether or not I retain it for the full Bestiary.
> 
> Essentially a rules-lite version of my magic system (without the frills of new types of magic).
> 
> Basically it takes the Improved Spell Capacity feat and changes it to a free metamagic slot (to avoid confusion with Improved Spell Capacity I may call this Metamagic Freedom).
> 
> So If I have 24 Metamagic Freedom feats, every spell I cast could be Heightened 24 times, or Empowered 12 times (x7 damage), or any combination of metamagic you want - based upon the metamagic feats you have (allowing metamagic to stack obviously).
> 
> The difference between this and I.S.C. is that you don't have to work out how many darn spells of each level above 9th you have - which is a bloody nightmare.
> 
> The trade off is that you have less total spells* (since I.S.C. gives you +1 spell and the chance for bonus spells due to very high ability scores).
> 
> However, the benefit is twofold. Firstly that every spell you have benefits from the full metamagic effect (if required) for each spell - in contrast to the I.S.C. which is limiting.
> 
> eg. Here is the current Cherubim Spell Numeration:
> 
> 6/15/14/14/14/14/12/12/12/12/*7/7/7/7/6/6/6/6/5/5/5/5/4/4/4/4/3/3/3/3/2/2/2/2*
> 
> Under the new regime that would become:
> 
> 6/15/14/14/14/14/12/12/12/12
> 
> But instead of having x2 33rd-level spells, x2 32nd-level spells etc. You would have x12 33rd-level spells.
> 
> The second reason is that it doesn't make lower level spells obsolete. I mean, what deity is going to bother with 9th-level spells when they can cast 33rd-level spells. The choices become irrelevant. This way the actual 3rd-level spells you take (for instance) still mean something when you are 66th-level.
> 
> I just wasn't having any fun working out every individual levels spell-list, I'd much rather be working out favourite spells for the tactics sections.
> 
> By the way, I don't like the idea of this stacking with Improved Metamagic, just to let you know. Also, technically it would replace multispell as well. Instead of multispell you just stack two quickened spells. etc.
> 
> Any comments?



Hi mate!

I hope you're keeping well, haven't talked to you for some time!

Doesn't that change make spellcasters a lot less powerful? Instead of casting 108 spells above level 9, they can cast 12 spells of level 33. Also, doesn't that leave a huge gap in spell power? Your Cherubim has 12 spells of level 9 then 12 of level 33 with nothing in between (he can of course choose not to use all the metamagic, but that is just a waste).

I'm not sure I really like this idea, that seems to move away from core A LOT.

Sorry


----------



## Upper_Krust

poilbrun said:
			
		

> Hi mate!




Hey poilbrun matey! 



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> I hope you're keeping well, haven't talked to you for some time!




Well funny you mention it I have been poorly for the past three or four days with a cold/flu type scenario. Nothing too bad, but just enough to niggle.



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> Doesn't that change make spellcasters a lot less powerful?




Not as far as I can see. 



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> Instead of casting 108 spells above level 9, they can cast 12 spells of level 33.




Instead of having 108 spells above 9th (tapering from 10th to 33rd), now all the spells are effectively greater than 9th! 0th-level spells become 24th-level spells, 1st-level become 25th, 2nd become 26th, 3rd become 27th, 4th become 28th, 5th become 29th, 6th become 30th, 7th become 31st, 8th become 32nd and 9th become 33rd.

So you would now have 125 spells of 24th-level or higher. Whereas otherwise you only had 28 spells of 24th-level or higher.



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> Also, doesn't that leave a huge gap in spell power?




Not as far as I can see.



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> Your Cherubim has 12 spells of level 9 then 12 of level 33 with nothing in between (he can of course choose not to use all the metamagic, but that is just a waste).




The 12 9th-level spells become 12 33rd-level spells. The 12 8th-level spells become 32nd-level spells etc.



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> I'm not sure I really like this idea, that seems to move away from core A LOT.




I think you may have picked up on it wrong. Either that or I explained it hastily.



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> Sorry




What do you think now?


----------



## Zoatebix

I'd have to see how it plays out, but the concept looks really great.  It's elegant, scalable, uses material people already know in a new way that suits epic and immortal -level play, and it reduces book keeping.

Preparing a huge list of spells still looks like such a pain that I wouldn't want to do it, but at least you've made it less of a pain.  Figuring 125 things out is less work than figuring 233 things out.  I'd still rather run a Sorceror (or maybe an alternate magic system - this is the one and only instance where I would miss the core metamagic system that AU/AE dropped in favor of better things) than a Wizard at that level just to make my life as a GM or player easier.


----------



## jmucchiello

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Instead of having 108 spells above 9th (tapering from 10th to 33rd), now all the spells are effectively greater than 9th! 0th-level spells become 24th-level spells, 1st-level become 25th, 2nd become 26th, 3rd become 27th, 4th become 28th, 5th become 29th, 6th become 30th, 7th become 31st, 8th become 32nd and 9th become 33rd.
> 
> So you would now have 125 spells of 24th-level or higher. Whereas otherwise you only had 28 spells of 24th-level or higher.
> 
> I think you may have picked up on it wrong. Either that or I explained it hastily.



Are you saying that a 0-level spell with 24 level of metamagic is remotely similar to a 9th level spell? I don't care how empowered it is, ray of frost is not the spell I want to be casting at CR 66 opponents.

Also, by the rules in 3.5, you can't use the same metamagic feat on the same spell twice. This is the purpose behind +8 and +9 level metamagic feats in the EPH -- something has to make those 30th level spells.


----------



## Fieari

That's why Krust created this "Metamagic Freedom" feat, it seems to me.  I might be reading into this too far, but from his description, it seems to me that it would looks something like this:

Feat: *Metamagic Freedom*
Prerequisits: Epic level (maybe others as well)
Benefit: You can stack a metamagic feat with itself once.  Thus, you could use this feat to cast a doubly enlarged fireball for the appropriate spell level adjustment.
Special: You may take this feat more than once.  Each time it is taken, you may layer another level of metamagic onto the spell.  For example, if you take Metamagic Freedom twice, you would be able to case a triply enlarged fireball.

Of couse, since I'm operating on WAY too little sleep right now, I'm sure Krust worded his text much better than I did, but you should be able to get the jist.


----------



## Verequus

Hey UK!

Look here for thread for another book about gods: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=126885 You like to read them, don't you?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Zoatebix mate! 



			
				Zoatebix said:
			
		

> I'd have to see how it plays out, but the concept looks really great.  It's elegant, scalable, uses material people already know in a new way that suits epic and immortal -level play, and it reduces book keeping.




Exactly, its quick, simple and very easy to manage. Also it cuts down on a lot of book keeping, which is priority number one at epic levels.



			
				Zoatebix said:
			
		

> Preparing a huge list of spells still looks like such a pain that I wouldn't want to do it, but at least you've made it less of a pain.




Picking spells from the book is easy enough. But its having to 'work out' appropriate spells + metamagic is a real soul-drainer.



			
				Zoatebix said:
			
		

> Figuring 125 things out is less work than figuring 233 things out.




Yes but you can pick out even 125 spells in about 15 minutes, but try working out a hundred or more that have to be combined with metamagic and it is a chore like you wouldn't believe.



			
				Zoatebix said:
			
		

> I'd still rather run a Sorceror (or maybe an alternate magic system - this is the one and only instance where I would miss the core metamagic system that AU/AE dropped in favor of better things) than a Wizard at that level just to make my life as a GM or player easier.




Indeed. Although I think this is the simple solution for scaling magic above 20th. When you see how quick and simple the alternate magics are you will love it.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hiya mate! 



			
				jmucchiello said:
			
		

> Are you saying that a 0-level spell with 24 level of metamagic is remotely similar to a 9th level spell?




No of course not, but I note you didn't say 1st-level spell...which is when the real magic begins anyway! 



			
				jmucchiello said:
			
		

> I don't care how empowered it is, ray of frost is not the spell I want to be casting at CR 66 opponents.




What about an x2 enhanced, x8 empowered shocking grasp for 125d6 electrical damage, thats off the top of my head without even considering min/max capabilities.



			
				jmucchiello said:
			
		

> Also, by the rules in 3.5, you can't use the same metamagic feat on the same spell twice. This is the purpose behind +8 and +9 level metamagic feats in the EPH -- something has to make those 30th level spells.




Yes but with all due respect that rule is as flawed as the improved spell capacity feat and was designed by someone either with a thin grasp of epic gaming or a great love of book keeping.

But if it makes you feel any better I can always create a feat that lets you stack metamagic, although I have tested this application of metamagic and it holds up to ANY level...provided you don't use Improved Metamagic and Multispell feats.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Fieari dude! 



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> That's why Krust created this "Metamagic Freedom" feat, it seems to me.




No. I would use the original idea to specifically give you a free metamagic slot. Sort of like the Automatic [Quicken] Spell epic feat except that you would get +1 level of ANY metamagic.



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> I might be reading into this too far, but from his description, it seems to me that it would looks something like this:
> 
> Feat: *Metamagic Freedom*
> Prerequisits: Epic level (maybe others as well)
> Benefit: You can stack a metamagic feat with itself once. Thus, you could use this feat to cast a doubly enlarged fireball for the appropriate spell level adjustment.
> Special: You may take this feat more than once.  Each time it is taken, you may layer another level of metamagic onto the spell.  For example, if you take Metamagic Freedom twice, you would be able to case a triply enlarged fireball.
> 
> Of couse, since I'm operating on WAY too little sleep right now, I'm sure Krust worded his text much better than I did, but you should be able to get the jist.




Rebadged 'Improved Metamagic' this would work great as the feat of officialdom for jmuchiello.

Or perhaps I'll call this application Metamagic Freedom and the other Improved Metamagic Capacity or something like that.


----------



## Upper_Krust

RuleMaster said:
			
		

> Hey UK!




Hiya mate! 



			
				RuleMaster said:
			
		

> Look here for thread for another book about gods: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=126885 You like to read them, don't you?




Yes I have been waiting for this one for a while. Sounds good, although again they seem to be going the way of the avatar. So it seems targeted more to sub-epic gaming. One other thing is that they are covering much the same pantheons as D&Dg. But I'll still definately be getting it as soon as I see it.


----------



## Sledge

I really do like the metamagic freedom idea, however, my Epic character already has all the Auto whatever feats (all 9 even) plus has started into multispelling...  Guess I'll have to do some converting to adapt to your stuff when it finally arrives.  Will you offer any guidelines for conversion?


----------



## poilbrun

Hi UK!

Indeed, I did not understand correctly. I thought the caster would get spells from level 1 to 9, then 12 33rd-level slots. Even after you explained it correctly, I think the lowest level spell being 24th is a bit overkill. Why would I use a 125d6 shocking grasp on a CR2 Ogre when a 3rd-level 10d6 fireball will kill it anyway. Of course, against a creature with an appropriate CR, only the high-level metamagic spells will be useful, but for most envounters with non-epic NPC or monsters, spells from level 1 to 9, hell!, for that matter, from 10 to 22 too, can perfectly do the trick.

I find it strange, especially from you who advocate play between high-level characters and low-lewel NPC, that you would sacrifice normal spell levels.

On another matter, congrats to Liverpool for their victory on Juventus, too bad they can't seem to find a goalkeeper who doesn't make one stupid mistake in every Champions' League, especially when he's good enough to do saves likes others he did yesterday.


----------



## Impeesa

I would think it would be a trivial matter to add in that the caster may forego some or all of the increased effect if they choose.

--Impeesa--


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey there Sledge! 



			
				Sledge said:
			
		

> I really do like the metamagic freedom idea, however, my Epic character already has all the Auto whatever feats (all 9 even) plus has started into multispelling...  Guess I'll have to do some converting to adapt to your stuff when it finally arrives.  Will you offer any guidelines for conversion?




Well it seems a pretty straightforward feat swop.

Each Auto Quicken/Silent/Still Spell feat, each Improved Spell Capacity feat and each Multispell feat would be changed to:

Improved Metamagic Capacity.

...and if you wanted to stack metamagic take Metamagic Freedom as well.

So if you had the nine Auto feats and one Multispell. You could take nine Improved Metamagic Capacity and one Metamagic Freedom.

That way your spells would be 9th (formerly 0th) to 18th (formerly 9th). You could cast a maximised, x3 empowered Meteor Swarm for a potential 480 damage.


----------



## Upper_Krust

poilbrun said:
			
		

> Hi UK!




Hiya mate! 



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> Indeed, I did not understand correctly. I thought the caster would get spells from level 1 to 9, then 12 33rd-level slots. Even after you explained it correctly, I think the lowest level spell being 24th is a bit overkill. Why would I use a 125d6 shocking grasp on a CR2 Ogre when a 3rd-level 10d6 fireball will kill it anyway.




...but if you are a 66th-level Spellcaster what the heck are you doing fighting a CR2 Ogre. You should be fighting Vaprak himself (Ogre/Troll Demigod).



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> Of course, against a creature with an appropriate CR, only the high-level metamagic spells will be useful, but for most envounters with non-epic NPC or monsters, spells from level 1 to 9, hell!, for that matter, from 10 to 22 too, can perfectly do the trick.




Well first off the example was for a 133HD Elder God Angelic Super-Galaxian.



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> I find it strange, especially from you who advocate play between high-level characters and low-lewel NPC, that you would sacrifice normal spell levels.




But I haven't sacrificed anything. The Improved Metamagic Capacity feat does not force you to add metamagic to spells, simply gives you the option.

As to advocating play between high and low level characters I think you have a mistaken impression of my original comments; which I am sure were either about staggering divine power so as to not create a flawed two tiered system like WotCs Deities & Demigods, or making non-epic-level gaming still relevant to immortals through worship points.

Interaction does not always mean combat, but power is still power. A 30th-level wizard vs. a horde of orcs is still a miss-match. Just like a greater god vs. a party of 30th-level characters.

The Immortals Handbook is not dumbing or powering down greater gods so they can fight sub-epic characters. Its about making the actions and lives of non-epic characters still relevant to deities with regards worship, politics and so forth.



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> On another matter, congrats to Liverpool for their victory on Juventus, too bad they can't seem to find a goalkeeper who doesn't make one stupid mistake in every Champions' League, especially when he's good enough to do saves likes others he did yesterday.




Tell Isabelle I said   

Hey Impeesa matey! 



			
				Impeesa said:
			
		

> I would think it would be a trivial matter to add in that the caster may forego some or all of the increased effect if they choose.




Exactly.


----------



## Nifelhein

It seems you moved the spell slots up a level for every feat taken, I like that a lot easier and more simple, but would then the new 2nd level slots allow for a normal 2nd levels spell? Because if ends up that way it just rocks in bookkeeping, easyness and also, i doubt power wise it is a problem, someone with all spells slots being higher than 9th level ends up having no need to memorize spells lwoer than that level.

i like it.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hi Nifelhein mate! 



			
				Nifelhein said:
			
		

> It seems you moved the spell slots up a level for every feat taken, I like that a lot easier and more simple,




Not exactly. Nothing is moved as such. Simply that you get free metamagic slots.

Think about the Automatic Quicken Spell epic feat. If you take this you can automatically quicken any spell of 1st-3rd level. You don't have to pay for the quicken spell with spell slots.

Improved Metamagic Capacity works similar to that. You can automatically apply +1 spell slot worth of ANY metamagic (you have) to ANY spell you have.

If you take the feat twice you get +2 free spell slots.

You don't actually gain any more spells.



			
				Nifelhein said:
			
		

> but would then the new 2nd level slots allow for a normal 2nd levels spell?




I'm not sure what you mean here mate?   

Any 2nd level spells you have are still 2nd level spells. Simply that you get to add free metamagic to them depending on the number of Improved Metamagic Capacity feats you have.

Also remember that you still get to apply metamagic as normal. SO you could take a 2nd-level spell and add +7 Metamagic spell slots - making it take up a 9th-level spell slot. THEN you could add your Improved Metamagic Capacity on top of that.

So the Cherubim 66th-level cleric could cast an enlarged, empowered, maximised searing light (3rd-level spell) as a 9th-level spell slot. THEN add a further x12 empowerments (due to Metamagic Freedom and 24 Improved Metamagic Capacity feats) for 600 damage against a Nosferatu prince.



			
				Nifelhein said:
			
		

> Because if ends up that way it just rocks in bookkeeping, easyness and also, i doubt power wise it is a problem, someone with all spells slots being higher than 9th level ends up having no need to memorize spells lwoer than that level.
> 
> i like it.


----------



## Fieari

As I'm still slightly unsure of what you mean, let me try and explain it as I currently see what you are saying.

You have the feats Enlarge and Quicken.  You take Improved Metamagic Capacity once.  Now, all your level 1 spells are Enlarged and Quickened for free.  Or perhaps all your level 1 spells are Enlarged OR Quickened for free?

You take Improved Metamagic Capacity again.  Now, all your level 2 spells are Enlarged and/or Quickened for free (Or perhaps Doubly Enlarged* for Free, not quickened?).

Or is it that if you take Improved Metamagic Capacity, all your level 1 spells are just Enlarged for free.  Taken twice, level 1 spells are doubly enlarged*, level 2 spells are just plain enlarged for free.  Taken 4 times, level 1 spells are quickened for free (or enlarged x4* for free).

How does this work?

*Assuming you have Metamagic Freedom to back it up.


----------



## Sledge

Hmmm I may try throwing this into the game next time we do get our epics playing.  Balancewise it might have to be tweaked a bit for this campaign, as we have a bit more feats than I think is normal at level 42.


----------



## Nifelhein

Hi UK!

I just got it wrong, like the feat would make your slots go up a level, making you have only slots of 2nd through 10th level available after getting it, still seems easy enough for me.

Anyway, I got it now, but what level are those spell slots gained, that is the picture I did not get.


----------



## poilbrun

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> But I haven't sacrificed anything. The Improved Metamagic Capacity feat does not force you to add metamagic to spells, simply gives you the option.



Of course not, but I still think adding to the power of spells while lowering their number is not always a fair trade-off. 



			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> As to advocating play between high and low level characters I think you have a mistaken impression of my original comments; which I am sure were either about staggering divine power so as to not create a flawed two tiered system like WotCs Deities & Demigods, or making non-epic-level gaming still relevant to immortals through worship points.
> 
> Interaction does not always mean combat, but power is still power. A 30th-level wizard vs. a horde of orcs is still a miss-match. Just like a greater god vs. a party of 30th-level characters.
> 
> The Immortals Handbook is not dumbing or powering down greater gods so they can fight sub-epic characters. Its about making the actions and lives of non-epic characters still relevant to deities with regards worship, politics and so forth.



My 17th level party (only 3 players - 1 fighter/sorcerer/spellsword, 1 rogue/duelist and 1 wizard/cleric/mystic theurge) and their 3 15th level cohorts (1 fighter/wizard/spellsword, 1 ranger/arcane archer, 1 cleric/wizard/mystic theurge) encountered an orc horde. Even though individually they were low-level, they still had problems, simply because they had to keep their high-level spells for the time when they would fight the higher-level NPC who were behind the orc attack.

Put that into perspective for a 60th level wizard. He needs to go down in Hell to retrieve an agent of good from the clutches of an Archduke. On the way there, he will encounter tons of lower CR devils. Should he burn 24th level spells to fight against Bearded Devils or keep them when he will face Pit Fiends or the Archduke himself?

Furthermore, I'm afraid that you would only get to see a couple of spells. Why would anyone bother with lower-level spells when using less metamagic on higher-level spells give you the same result with an higher spell DC? And if you only use the same spells again and again with different level of metamagic, where's the fun?

I completely agree that your system is more elegant than having to select spell lists and memorize 300 hundred spells (which also brings the problem of the same spells being selected over and over again - what sane player would have a different spell selection each day?), but I really think that some of the issues it raises are bad. Sorry


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Fieari dude! 



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> As I'm still slightly unsure of what you mean, let me try and explain it as I currently see what you are saying.




Okay



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> You have the feats Enlarge and Quicken.  You take Improved Metamagic Capacity once.  Now, all your level 1 spells are Enlarged and Quickened for free.  Or perhaps all your level 1 spells are Enlarged OR Quickened for free?




Wrong.

You have the feats Enlarge and Quicken. You take Improved Metamagic Capacity once. You now gain +1 free spell level slot worth of Metamagic to apply to any spell. So you could:

a) Enlarge Spell only takes up one spell slot so you could apply that for free to all you spells without increasing the spell slot.

b) Quicken Spell requires four spell slots. So you can't apply that for free but you could Quicken a 6th-level spell as a 9th-level spell slot.

6th-level spell + Quicken Spell = 10th-level spell slot - 1 level spell slot (for Improved Metamagic Capacity)



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> You take Improved Metamagic Capacity again.  Now, all your level 2 spells are Enlarged and/or Quickened for free (Or perhaps Doubly Enlarged* for Free, not quickened?).




Wrong. See above.

If you had two Imp. Metamagic Capacity feats you get two free spell level slots.

The key you are missing is that Metamagic costs spell levels. Improved Metamagic Capacity gives you one free spell level each time.



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> Or is it that if you take Improved Metamagic Capacity, all your level 1 spells are just Enlarged for free.  Taken twice, level 1 spells are doubly enlarged*, level 2 spells are just plain enlarged for free.  Taken 4 times, level 1 spells are quickened for free (or enlarged x4* for free).
> 
> How does this work?
> 
> *Assuming you have Metamagic Freedom to back it up.




This is slightly better, but remember the bonus spell level slots from Imp. Metamagic Capacity work on any spell you have.

Taken four times you could quicken ANY spell for free. Taken four times (with Metamagic Freedom) you could Enlarge a spell four times.

ALso you can use Metamagic as normal AND THEN apply the IMC bonuses on top.

So you could take a 5th-level spell and quicken it (it now uses a 9th-level spell slot). Then if you had IMC (x4) and MF, you could quicken another spell (same as multispell).


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hiya Sledge mate! 



			
				Sledge said:
			
		

> Hmmm I may try throwing this into the game next time we do get our epics playing.  Balancewise it might have to be tweaked a bit for this campaign, as we have a bit more feats than I think is normal at level 42.




Good luck with it. Its always a touch strange revising rules you are used to but I think its pretty solid.



			
				Nifelhein said:
			
		

> Hi UK!




Hiya matey! 



			
				Nifelhein said:
			
		

> I just got it wrong, like the feat would make your slots go up a level, making you have only slots of 2nd through 10th level available after getting it, still seems easy enough for me.
> 
> Anyway, I got it now, but what level are those spell slots gained, that is the picture I did not get.




You gain them every time you take Improved Metamagic Capacity epic feat.

Each time you take it you gain +1 free level worth of metamagic spell slots.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey poilbrun matey! 



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> Of course not, but I still think adding to the power of spells while lowering their number is not always a fair trade-off.




Well, the added power is optional. But it actually makes lower level spells valid again.

The lower number of spells saves a lot of preplanning at epic levels.

Under the official WotC rules, epic characters end up with dozens of totally worthless spells. My rules change this.

If you were actually at 60th-level under the official rules you would never consider using your low level spells, which means they become totally pointless and in fact detrimental to the game, cluttering up time.



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> My 17th level party (only 3 players - 1 fighter/sorcerer/spellsword, 1 rogue/duelist and 1 wizard/cleric/mystic theurge) and their 3 15th level cohorts (1 fighter/wizard/spellsword, 1 ranger/arcane archer, 1 cleric/wizard/mystic theurge) encountered an orc horde. Even though individually they were low-level, they still had problems, simply because they had to keep their high-level spells for the time when they would fight the higher-level NPC who were behind the orc attack.
> 
> Put that into perspective for a 60th level wizard. He needs to go down in Hell to retrieve an agent of good from the clutches of an Archduke. On the way there, he will encounter tons of lower CR devils. Should he burn 24th level spells to fight against Bearded Devils or keep them when he will face Pit Fiends or the Archduke himself?




Well lets really put that into perspective. 

Throw in probably 75+ spells per day, scrolls, epic magic items (ring of wizardry anyone, rods, staves, wands), epic spells, artifacts?, cohorts, summoned monsters, and at 60th-level the Wizards familiar will probably be able to kill Pit Fiends. 

The only way you can possibly run out of spells at that level is if you are tactically inept.



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> Furthermore, I'm afraid that you would only get to see a couple of spells.




How is that possible? One spell does not do everything...even wish has limits and you are not likely to have an infinite supply of those.



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> Why would anyone bother with lower-level spells when using less metamagic on higher-level spells give you the same result with an higher spell DC?




...and you are about to tell me how this doesn't apply in even greater measure to the official rules?

If my spells are:

6/15/14/14/14/14/12/12/12/12/7/7/7/7/6/6/6/6/5/5/5/5/4/4/4/4/3/3/3/3/2/2/2/2

When would I ever bother with the lowest hundred (or so) of those spells? I already have 108 spells of 10th-level or higher. Those are practically never going to run out in a given situation. The other 125 spells become practically obsolete.

With my system the difference between your worst spell and your best spell is always still going to be 9 levels. With the official rules the difference could be 20 levels, 30 levels or 40 levels.



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> And if you only use the same spells again and again with different level of metamagic, where's the fun?




Well first off, remember this is a quick application of my magic system, it doesn't include the new types of magic. Neither does it include the new 10th+ level spells - some mighty spells only become available at 15th-level, or 33rd-level or 100th-level etc.



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> I completely agree that your system is more elegant than having to select spell lists and memorize 300 hundred spells (which also brings the problem of the same spells being selected over and over again - what sane player would have a different spell selection each day?),




Indeed.



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> but I really think that some of the issues it raises are bad. Sorry




No apologies necessary mate, I value your opinion and constructive criticism. However I think in this case the positives of these changes FAR outweigh any perceived negatives.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey all! 

By the way I have just decided the name Automatic Metamagic Capacity might be better suited.

Since it combines 'Automatic' from Automatic Quicken/Silent/Still Spell and the 'Capacity' from Improved Spell Capacity. Which are essentially the main feats its replacing.

I also think that with the 'Automatic' stated up front might help people grasp the idea a bit quicker.


----------



## Anabstercorian

I support this alteration of the epic magic rules.


----------



## Nifelhein

I do support it too, make it all the more simple you can.


----------



## Greybar

Re: Polibrun's concerns about still wanting to use lower level spells for lower level enemies.

While I understand UK's assumption that magic items can probably fill the gap, here's something to consider that isn't wholly thought out yet.

What if the Improved/Advanced Super Spell Thingy feat allowed you to effortlessly cast spells of lower levels, maybe in combination with another feat.  Let's call in "Thoughtless Casting".

Thoughtless Casting is like a +4 level metamagic that lets you cast any spell you are capable of, without memorizing it.  This then combines with the free-metamagic feats such that...

Poliburn's epic Wizard has Thoughtless Casting and Advanced Capacity x10.  He can thus cast a 6th level spell equivalent without losing a slot - just from sheer force of will.  (6th level spell +4 for Thoughtless = 10 from capacity).  Similarly, he could thoughtlessly cast a quickened second level spell (2 level + 4 quickened + 4 thoughtless).

This gives the high level wizard, cleric, or deific being a casual access to the mortal realms of spells without bothering with huge lists of memorizations.

how's that sound?

john


----------



## Upper_Krust

Appreciate the support guys! 

Hey there Greybar! 



			
				Greybar said:
			
		

> Re: Polibrun's concerns about still wanting to use lower level spells for lower level enemies.




If that was his only concern then its unfounded since theres nothing to say you have to use the free metamagic even if its available.

In fact to be honest I am not exactly sure what poilbruns concerns are at this point?

Too few spells?

A 60th-level Wizard with Intelligence 60 and Improved Spell Capacity x16 (4/5 of all epic feats) will have 102 spells (0-9th) and only 56 spells (10th-25th)

An 80th-level Wizard with Intelligence 80 and Improved Spell Capacity x24 (4/5 of all epic feats) will have 124 spells (0-9th) and 124 spells (10th-33rd).



			
				Greybar said:
			
		

> While I understand UK's assumption that magic items can probably fill the gap, here's something to consider that isn't wholly thought out yet.




Hold on there. I don't see that there is a gap. Not a valid one anyway. I only made those comments to further alleviate poilbruns fears.

There is nothing that needs to be plugged. Admittedly characters will have less spells, but the difference only reaches 50% when you have an ability score in around 80+ and about 25+ Improved Spell Capacity feats and by that time you already have over 120 spells (0-9th) anyway for goodness sake! Not to mention your top end spells are going to be stretched over 34 or so levels using the official rules.



			
				Greybar said:
			
		

> What if the Improved/Advanced Super Spell Thingy feat allowed you to effortlessly cast spells of lower levels, maybe in combination with another feat.  Let's call in "Thoughtless Casting".




Doesn't Eschew Materials combined with Silent Spell and Still Spell (and two Automatic Metamagic Capacity feats) already accomplish this?



			
				Greybar said:
			
		

> Thoughtless Casting is like a +4 level metamagic that lets you cast any spell you are capable of, without memorizing it.  This then combines with the free-metamagic feats such that...




To me this is like the Intensify Spell metamagic feat - Irrelevant in the light of Metamagic Freedom.

Thoughtless Casting would simply be a combination of Eschew Materials, Silent Spell, Still Spell and two Automatic Metamagic Capacity feats.



			
				Greybar said:
			
		

> Poliburn's epic Wizard has Thoughtless Casting and Advanced Capacity x10.  He can thus cast a 6th level spell equivalent without losing a slot - just from sheer force of will.  (6th level spell +4 for Thoughtless = 10 from capacity).  Similarly, he could thoughtlessly cast a quickened second level spell (2 level + 4 quickened + 4 thoughtless).
> 
> This gives the high level wizard, cleric, or deific being a casual access to the mortal realms of spells without bothering with huge lists of memorizations.
> 
> how's that sound?




It sounds exactly the same thing I have been saying except that you have added the unnecessary element of Thoughtless Casting.


----------



## poilbrun

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> If that was his only concern then its unfounded since theres nothing to say you have to use the free metamagic even if its available.



My concern was more that in the example you had, where the wizard only had spell slots from 24th to 33rd level, you have to use up a 24th level slot to use magic missile, whether you use metamagic or not.



			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> In fact to be honest I am not exactly sure what poilbruns concerns are at this point?



I'll wait to see the whole system for characters, because I am not totally convinced yet. However, I wholeheartedly agree that it is a lot easier for monster design.

While I care that my 60th level wizard looses lower-level spell slots, I don't care about the fact that my 60HD monster can cast a 1st-level spell without metamagic. Though I just realized that a 60th level wizard could probably fight a a monster with a CR lower than 10 in close combat without any risk.



			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Too few spells?



I still think that it could be an issue in some circumstances. There are times when you want to have as many spells as possible, either because you will use a lot of them, or because you cannot regain your spells. AFAIK, it has happened twice in the Forgotten Realms that a cleric could not regain spells: during the Time of Trouble, and because of the silence of Lolth. It can also happen if you travel to a plane where contact with your deity is impossible. You'd be more than happy to have a LOT of spells.



			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> A 60th-level Wizard with Intelligence 60 and Improved Spell Capacity x16 (4/5 of all epic feats) will have 102 spells (0-9th) and only 56 spells (10th-25th)
> 
> An 80th-level Wizard with Intelligence 80 and Improved Spell Capacity x24 (4/5 of all epic feats) will have 124 spells (0-9th) and 124 spells (10th-33rd).



Is it possible to keep up at a +1 to INT every level? I don't feel like making the calculation (especially not when I'm at work with no book at hand!), but that looks like a lot. +20 is +5 at every 4 levels, probably +6 to +8 from upgrading an headband of intellect, but where can the other +7 come from, as inherent bonuses are max +5?


----------



## Greybar

Upper Krust,

I think I failed to get across one important aspect of the feel I'm looking for.  Using this proposed new feat does not burn spell slots, effectively making using that spell act like a "Spell Like Power At Will".  A weilder of power at this level can toss of trifling magics without any expenditure of his effort at all.

The objective is two fold:
1) Don't make the caster memorize low level spells that really don't add to the kinds of stories he is involved in.  Saves PC book keeping time, so he doesn't have to write down 124 + 124 spells.
2) Make dealing with minor tasks absolutely effortless.  A cleric of 75th level can stroll down the street placing the blessings of his deity (in the form of the Resistance cantrip or such) effortlessly.

Now I'm not real sure about how the mechanism for that should work, but I still like the concept.  Did I make my idea more clear?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hi poilbrun matey! 



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> My concern was more that in the example you had, where the wizard only had spell slots from 24th to 33rd level, you have to use up a 24th level slot to use magic missile, whether you use metamagic or not.




Well, technically there are no such things as 24th-level 'slots'. You just get 0th-9th and then add the free metamagic...if you want to.



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> I'll wait to see the whole system for characters, because I am not totally convinced yet.




It seems okay to me.



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> However, I wholeheartedly agree that it is a lot easier for monster design.








			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> While I care that my 60th level wizard looses lower-level spell slots, I don't care about the fact that my 60HD monster can cast a 1st-level spell without metamagic. Though I just realized that a 60th level wizard could probably fight a a monster with a CR lower than 10 in close combat without any risk.




Lower than CR15* I envision. 

*My system that is of course, so CR 10 monster or (approx.) 15th-level character for WotC. 



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> I still think that it could be an issue in some circumstances. There are times when you want to have as many spells as possible, either because you will use a lot of them, or because you cannot regain your spells. AFAIK, it has happened twice in the Forgotten Realms that a cleric could not regain spells: during the Time of Trouble, and because of the silence of Lolth. It can also happen if you travel to a plane where contact with your deity is impossible. You'd be more than happy to have a LOT of spells.




Of course you would, but in both the examples you mentioned the very _raison d'etre_ of the plot device is/was to eventually grind you down. 

The number of spells you have is secondary to the situation at hand. 

A 20th-level Wizard casts 20 spells less than the same level Sorceror, thats a 50% increase for the Sorceror (before we factor Ability Score modifiers anyway).



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> Is it possible to keep up at a +1 to INT every level? I don't feel like making the calculation (especially not when I'm at work with no book at hand!), but that looks like a lot. +20 is +5 at every 4 levels, probably +6 to +8 from upgrading an headband of intellect, but where can the other +7 come from, as inherent bonuses are max +5?




Not sure (it was just an example) although I would expect closer to a headband of epic intellect +26 at 80th-level...not to mention divine abilities and so forth.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Greybar said:
			
		

> Upper Krust,




Hi Greybar mate! 



			
				Greybar said:
			
		

> I think I failed to get across one important aspect of the feel I'm looking for.  Using this proposed new feat does not burn spell slots, effectively making using that spell act like a "Spell Like Power At Will".  A weilder of power at this level can toss of trifling magics without any expenditure of his effort at all.




Using Automatic Metamagic Capacity doesn't burn spell slots. You get to apply levels of metamagic for free.



			
				Greybar said:
			
		

> The objective is two fold:
> 1) Don't make the caster memorize low level spells that really don't add to the kinds of stories he is involved in.




I prefer to make those low level spells relevant at any level (by potentially increasing their power) rather than making them obsolete - which is a pointless waste.



			
				Greybar said:
			
		

> Saves PC book keeping time, so he doesn't have to write down 124 + 124 spells.




Under my rules you would only have the initial 124 spells (which is actually something like 60 base + 64 for high ability scores). Unless you are going to let someone cast miracle/wish at will you have to at least acknowledge the basic spells.



			
				Greybar said:
			
		

> 2) Make dealing with minor tasks absolutely effortless.  A cleric of 75th level can stroll down the street placing the blessings of his deity (in the form of the Resistance cantrip or such) effortlessly.




Any 75th-level Cleric that finds themselves just strolling down the street using cantrips has way too much time on their hands...unless of course the 'street' in question was some sort of cosmic highway flanked by the molten sarcophogi of twisted elder beings whose eternal guardians needed bolstering by the clerics heightened (to 40th-level) resistance cantrips. 



			
				Greybar said:
			
		

> Now I'm not real sure about how the mechanism for that should work, but I still like the concept.




I don't see any fundamental difference between what I suggest and what you inevitably want.

Can you tell me which parts of my system are you dissatisfied with?



			
				Greybar said:
			
		

> Did I make my idea more clear?




No. Or at least not to the extent that I can clearly see what you want - are you looking for the ability to cast (all?) spells at will, as spell-like abilities? If so thats something I deal with under divine abilities.


----------



## Greybar

That's okay, I think I'm just out of my depth here.
I'll look forward to seeing the final product so I can comment more intelligently.  It sounds like you have what I'm looking for covered.

p.s. I hope even 75th level clerics get to spend some time with the faithful, even if it's a brief vaca between episodes of saving the multiverse.


----------



## historian

Hey U_K!  


> Well first off the example was for a 133HD Elder God Angelic Super-Galaxian.




You should stat this beast and put it on the website. 

I'm also wondering where this guy would fall on the Marvel power scale. (SH-Z perhaps?) 

Your magic proposal  makes sense to me.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Greybar mate! 



			
				Greybar said:
			
		

> That's okay, I think I'm just out of my depth here.




Don't be silly mate, this is a new spell system entirely, we are all potentialy out of our depth. Maybe I just have a headstart because I created it. But I am sure, as with the CR system once people give it a try they will uncover the merits of it.



			
				Greybar said:
			
		

> I'll look forward to seeing the final product so I can comment more intelligently.  It sounds like you have what I'm looking for covered.




Okay.



			
				Greybar said:
			
		

> p.s. I hope even 75th level clerics get to spend some time with the faithful, even if it's a brief vaca between episodes of saving the multiverse.




I doubt there are very many 75th-level (mortal) Clerics, so their mere presence on a world could cause ripples throughout the kosmos, attracting undue outside attention to that place.


----------



## Upper_Krust

historian said:
			
		

> Hey U_K!




Hiya historian mate! 

WOOHOO - I just picked up 4 numbers in the lottery. 



			
				historian said:
			
		

> You should stat this beast and put it on the website.




I have it statted in the Bestiary preview. Its ridiculously powerful, just make sure you don't get caught by its Re-echoing Roar.  



			
				historian said:
			
		

> I'm also wondering where this guy would fall on the Marvel power scale. (SH-Z perhaps?)




Class 1000

Skyfathers (aka Greater Gods would be Shift-Z 500), Elder Gods Class 1000, Old Ones Class 3000 etc.



			
				historian said:
			
		

> Your magic proposal makes sense to me.




Thanks for the support.


----------



## historian

Hey U_K! 


> WOOHOO - I just picked up 4 numbers in the lottery.




Start-up capital maybe?  Actually, you should use any winnings to take a vacation . . . after the IH is done of course.  



> I have it statted in the Bestiary preview. Its ridiculously powerful, just make sure you don't get caught by its Re-echoing Roar.




Excellent, I'm sure it is ridiculously powerful.



> Class 1000
> 
> Skyfathers (aka Greater Gods would be Shift-Z 500), Elder Gods Class 1000, Old Ones Class 3000 etc.




Sweet.  I thought I remembered you having Skyfathers at SH-Y previously?  In any event, I think SH-Z makes more sense for Skyfathers based on the FASERIP/20 = CR formula.



> Thanks for the support.




You're welcome.


----------



## Upper_Krust

historian said:
			
		

> Hey U_K!




Hiya mate! 



			
				historian said:
			
		

> Start-up capital maybe?




Well its only £75 (about 110 Euros/$140), but better than nothing. 



			
				historian said:
			
		

> Actually, you should use any winnings to take a vacation




I don't know how far I would get on that.



			
				historian said:
			
		

> . . . after the IH is done of course.




Naturally. 



			
				historian said:
			
		

> Excellent, I'm sure it is ridiculously powerful.




Its tough, but the Seraphim are tougher. 



			
				historian said:
			
		

> Sweet.  I thought I remembered you having Skyfathers at SH-Y previously?




I don't think so, although anythings possible.



			
				historian said:
			
		

> In any event, I think SH-Z makes more sense for Skyfathers based on the FASERIP/20 = CR formula.




Possibly. Puts Marvel Thor at Demigod level though, which is probably about right for the comics.


----------



## S'mon

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> So you not only have to consider the physical repercussions of battles, but also the sociological repercussions of both your peers and your worshippers.
> 
> There have been many occasions whereby Thrin has had to circumvent the obvious (combat) to get the desired results. Or spend time maneouvering the opponent into a position where combat became an option.




Exactly - GM shouldn't prevent PCs murdering the NPC, just hit them with realistic repercussions.  Eg Thrin could have killed Hiro Kinoshi easily, but that would have accomplished nothing - Arasaka has a million more junior execs eager to take his place.  Keeping Kinoshi around meant that Thrin knew his enemy and was much better able to deal with the Arasaka threat, it also demonstrated adherence to the Cavalier Code of chivalry.  Mind you, I expect if Thrin could have killed Saburo Arasaka, the BBEG, I expect he would have done so.  In a quasi-feudal D&D setting, killing the enemy leader is often the best course of action; although holding them for ransom may be smarter if you're not worried about rescue attempts.   Thrin has been ransomed back to his pantheon at least twice now.


----------



## S'mon

So:

1.  Chaotic PCs - let them murder the Duke's son, but show them the consequences.  If they enjoy being hunted outlaws, fine.

2.  Lawful PCs - let them enjoy the benefits of playing within the rules.  Eg if they show chivalry to defeated enemies, enemies will do the same.  D&D actually discourages chivalrous & Lawful behaviour through the alignment system, which deliberately dehumanises the 'evil' enemy.  Use more human foes and don't make them Evil - Lawful Neutral is a great alignment for antagonists, I find.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey S'mon! 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Exactly - GM shouldn't prevent PCs murdering the NPC, just hit them with realistic repercussions.  Eg Thrin could have killed Hiro Kinoshi easily, but that would have accomplished nothing - Arasaka has a million more junior execs eager to take his place.  Keeping Kinoshi around meant that Thrin knew his enemy and was much better able to deal with the Arasaka threat, it also demonstrated adherence to the Cavalier Code of chivalry.  Mind you, I expect if Thrin could have killed Saburo Arasaka, the BBEG, I expect he would have done so.  In a quasi-feudal D&D setting, killing the enemy leader is often the best course of action; although holding them for ransom may be smarter if you're not worried about rescue attempts.




I think the 'trick' to high-level gaming (if indeed there is such a trick) is to be able to hurt the PCs without killing them. I mean players invest so much time in high/epic/immortal level characters that killing them is almost too much (unless they have deserved it of course).

So you want to set up as many facets as possible that you can hurt without killing the PC itself.

So you have things like: Wealth/Finances (including holdings, magic items), Servants/Cohorts, Reputation, Plans/Politics, as well as Worshippers and Responsibilities (Pantheon and Portfolio) for deities. 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Thrin has been ransomed back to his pantheon at least twice now.




Twice!?


----------



## S'mon

Thrin got captured by Dispater in that anti-magic vault and ransomed back, his corpse was also ransomed back by Vanya after she'd killed him in the Thyatian imperial palace.  I guess Hel agreeing to return Thrin's soul from Niflheim early in his career (after he'd been killed by Raistlin & failed his resurrection survival roll) doesn't really count.


----------



## S'mon

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> So you have things like: Wealth/Finances (including holdings, magic items), Servants/Cohorts, Reputation, Plans/Politics, as well as Worshippers and Responsibilities (Pantheon and Portfolio) for deities.




I agree - all these are good targets to attack.    

Craig didn't mention family & love interests, and I think that's right - if you constantly kidnap the PC's low-level girlfriend, the player will react by not forming any emotional relationship with low-level NPCs, and that harms the game.  Kidnap his magic sword or his high-level cohort instead.  

As Craig has said, the Worship POints system is brilliant for regulating PC deity behaviour, because their power literally waxes and wanes according to public opinion - if people think the PC is weak because he got beaten by the BBEG, he'll lose WPs and _become_ weak!  Whereas heroic (or villainous) acts will gain WPs and thus make the PC stronger.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey S'mon! 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Thrin got captured by Dispater in that anti-magic vault and ransomed back,




Thats the one I remembered...

Technically this was Ingrids fault...the only reason I fell for that trap was because it was the first day I met your (now) wife Ingrid. So it was like trying to keep conversations going and concentrate on the nuances of devil politicking all at once. A momentary lapse in concentration (probably when someone asked if I wanted milk and sugar with my earl grey) and I was caught in an anti-magic pit with bail set at 100 million gp.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> his corpse was also ransomed back by Vanya after she'd killed him in the Thyatian imperial palace.




Technically this one was Fergus fault...if he hadn't kept going on at me to conquer Thyatis (of which I knew nothing at the time) single handed, I never would have went in and started pimp slapping the locals..."I mean how hard can it be its just one goddess". Of course it turned out to be a Pantheon Head who also just happened to be a Goddess of War. Even after all that I still would have defeated her if it wasn't for those pesky kids (flukey 20th-leveler landed a crit on me just before Vanya shows up, and that 30 damage swayed the fight). Another 10 million gp up the swannay.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> I guess Hel agreeing to return Thrin's soul from Niflheim early in his career (after he'd been killed by Raistlin & failed his resurrection survival roll) doesn't really count.




Well technically that one was your fault...I had Raistlin on the ground, his arms were pinned (I made every roll you asked easily), how the hell could he still perform a rebributive strike with his staff. Not to mention when we eventually uncovered his full stats we found out that Staff of the Magus wasn't quite as powerful as a staff of the magi - in fact it could only cast something like light 2/day and had no retributive strike!!!

Thatwhole adventure was just bizarre. Our path gives us drow and archmages (pretty much all the bad guys from Dragonlance) up the wazoo. Mirv swans in joins up with all the dragonlance good guys then while they fight the Tarrasque, he backstabs it and wins the competition.

Bad memories all, I must have mind blanked them hence my initial forgetfulness.


----------



## S'mon

Raistlin - I guess he was Pinned But Not Helpless - very 3e.  

The description of Ret Strike doesn't require anything more than that you hold the staff - and Raist still had both hands on it.


----------



## Zoatebix

It looks like some epic-level theory stuff is popping up over in this thread...


----------



## Baronovan

Hey there, UK.

How's the editting coming along with the Bestiary preview?


----------



## CRGreathouse

Baronovan said:
			
		

> Hey there, UK.
> 
> How's the editting coming along with the Bestiary preview?




I'm sure he'll tell us when it starts.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey guys! 

I'm very, very close to having this done (I know - how many times has he said that).  

By the way Simon and I are toying around with some low level deity rules for his campaign. I am wondering if anyone would like to see some sort of alternate rules for low level deities in the Immortals Handbook?

By low level I mean sort of 25th-level demigods, 30th-level lesser gods, 40th-level greater gods with far fewer powers than something like Deities & Demigods (3rd Ed.) or the Immortals Handbook proper.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> By the way Simon and I are toying around with some low level deity rules for his campaign. I am wondering if anyone would like to see some sort of alternate rules for low level deities in the Immortals Handbook?
> 
> By low level I mean sort of 25th-level demigods, 30th-level lesser gods, 40th-level greater gods with far fewer powers than something like Deities & Demigods (3rd Ed.) or the Immortals Handbook proper.




I'd love to see that, but don't work on it until you have the basic book finished.


----------



## Greybar

I'd be interested.  That sounds like what I was toying with for my own game - where the line between ascension and real divine power is closer than mortals might imagine.

It might be underwhelming to see the divine powers that match up with those levels, though.  Would we want to see a 25th level demigod whose CR was only 30ish, for instance?  Or would the golden rule get bent fast as reasonable divine powers for something with 25 HD having a CR of 75+ ... ?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey guys! 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> I'd love to see that, but don't work on it until you have the basic book finished.




Its pretty much already done, I doubt it amounts to more than a page all told, it was fleshed out with a couple of emails I swapped with Simon over the past few days. The initial impetus was his 4th simony article on the website about converting deities but keeping a low 1st Edition feel. 



			
				Greybar said:
			
		

> I'd be interested. That sounds like what I was toying with for my own game - where the line between ascension and real divine power is closer than mortals might imagine.




...sort of "On your doorstep deities".



			
				Greybar said:
			
		

> It might be underwhelming to see the divine powers that match up with those levels, though. Would we want to see a 25th level demigod whose CR was only 30ish, for instance? Or would the golden rule get bent fast as reasonable divine powers for something with 25 HD having a CR of 75+ ... ?




Well I haven't done an accurate assessment of divinity under these alternate rules yet, but I anticipate even what amounts to the Greater God template would be under CR +10.

Probably something like:

Hero: CR +1
Quasi: CR +2
Demi: CR +3
Lesser: CR +4
Inter: CR +6
Greater: CR +8

Thats just a wild guess on my part. Those are WotC CRs by the way.


----------



## S'mon

CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> I'd love to see that, but don't work on it until you have the basic book finished.




It's me doing the work, Craig is just providing (valuable) input.  

There's a taster at immortalshandbook.com, pt 4 of GMing for deities.  In the article hp/4.5 to find 1e Hit Dice should prob be changed to hp/4 BTW, which is the IH official rule.


----------



## S'mon

The divine powers I'm using are the ones from 1e Manual of the Planes, I agree with Craig they're at most +8 CR, probably less.

Here's another taster - a draft of Odin, using my "Gods Like Men" (TM) system:
Odin the Greater God

Bbn-4/Wiz-18/Clr-18   Spell Caster Level: 36  Max Enchantment: +12
Base stats: ST 30 DE 30 CO 30 IN 30 WI 36  CH 30
+16 Enhancements (slotless): ST 46 DE 46 CO 46 IN 46 WI 52 CH 46
BAB +26/Grapple +44
Epic Feats: Epic SR x3 (+6), Epic DR x2 (6), Light Armour Mastery
Spell Resistance: 46   DR 15/+3  DR 6/-   Speed: 40'
Hit Points: 984   Home Plane x2: 1968 

SA: Greater God SA at 30th level, Telepathy 300 miles, shape change at will, Rage as BBn-40, can inspire Rage in allies within 30 yards (at their Character Level), Gaze paralyzes non-divine target at will (standard action, Will save DC 30 or paralysed 30 rounds),  

Gungnir: +12 Ghost Touch Keen Returning Spear ATT +58/+53/+48/+43 (Gtr Wpn Focus) dam: 5d10+39  crit: 18-20/x2 (Imp Crit)
10 pt PA: ATT +48/5d10+59
25 pt PA: ATT +33/5d10+89

AC: 68  (Natural Armour +12, Chain Shirt +12, Helm of Deflection +12, +18 DEX).


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey S'mon! 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> It's me doing the work, Craig is just providing (valuable) input.




Somebody has to keep you right. 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> There's a taster at immortalshandbook.com, pt 4 of GMing for deities.  In the article hp/4.5 to find 1e Hit Dice should prob be changed to hp/4 BTW, which is the IH official rule.




I'll go and change that...



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> The divine powers I'm using are the ones from 1e Manual of the Planes, I agree with Craig they're at most +8 CR, probably less.




When you factor in the wealth is about double PC as well, +8 is conservative.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Here's another taster - a draft of Odin, using my "Gods Like Men" (TM) system:




(TM) LOL! 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Odin the Greater God
> 
> Bbn-4/Wiz-18/Clr-18 Spell Caster Level: 36 Max Enchantment: +12
> Base stats: ST 30 DE 30 CO 30 IN 30 WI 36 CH 30
> +16 Enhancements (slotless): ST 46 DE 46 CO 46 IN 46 WI 52 CH 46
> BAB +26/Grapple +44
> Epic Feats: Epic SR x3 (+6), Epic DR x3 (9)
> Spell Resistance: 46 DR 15/+3 DR 9/- Speed: 40'
> Hit Points: 984 Home Plane x2: 1968
> 
> SA: Greater God SA at 30th level, Telepathy 300 miles, shape change at will, Rage as BBn-40, can inspire Rage in allies within 30 yards (at their Character Level), Gaze paralyzes non-divine target at will (standard action, Will save DC 30 or paralysed 30 rounds),
> 
> Gungnir: +12 Ghost Touch Keen Returning Spear ATT +58/+53/+48/+43 (Gtr Wpn Focus) dam: 5d10+39 crit: 18-20/x2 (Imp Crit)
> 10 pt PA: ATT +48/5d10+59
> 25 pt PA: ATT +33/5d10+89
> 
> AC: 68 (Natural Armour +12, Chainmail +12, Helm of Deflection +12, +18 DEX).




I made the changes you forgot. 

Incidently Odins spear is a +27 item (additional +12 mod. for is heightened damage).


----------



## S'mon

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> When you factor in the wealth is about double PC as well, +8 is conservative.
> 
> Incidently Odins spear is a +27 item (additional +12 mod. for is heightened damage).




I've edited the stats to incorporate Light Armour Mastery etc.  Wealth - yeah, I agree.  I didn't min-max Odin for melee (and after all, Fenrir swallows him & his horse in 1 bite!) but he's prob around CR 50 on WotC scale.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey S'mon! 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> I've edited the stats to incorporate Light Armour Mastery etc.  Wealth - yeah, I agree.  I didn't min-max Odin for melee




If you want I could take a look at him and see what I can do? Pimp your Odin a bit.

For starters I always though he was doing 6d10 damage (same as Zeus), and there is that thing I talked to you about adding more weapon special abilities to Gungnir.

As far as I can see, in a fight Nu-Thrin is dropping Odin like a bag o' dirt. Although Thrin is a 100% combat monkey now.

I rustled up a proprietry Thor, and had him fight Thrin. He was just too damaging though. Damn his 10d10 damage I say.   



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> (and after all, Fenrir swallows him & his horse in 1 bite!)




Well I have read 'accounts' where he puts up a fight and then gets eaten.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> but he's prob around CR 50 on WotC scale.




More or less.


----------



## Fieari

Did you actually get a chance to send the Bestiary Preview to the editors?  Have you recieved word back yet?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hi Fieari mate! 



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> Did you actually get a chance to send the Bestiary Preview to the editors?  Have you recieved word back yet?




I haven't finished it yet. Its just silly things at the moment that are holding me back, such as not being happy with certain paragraphs, some of the adventure ideas being a bit pedestrian for my tastes, a handful of abilities (such as the cometary dragons breath weapon) just don't work from my point of view. Its more 'tweaking' than work that needs done at this stage.

Incidently I'll have all the problems that have been dogging me at home sorted by tomorrow morning, so things should be going far faster from then on. Also I know all the mistakes I have made tackling this half of the bestiary and I won't make those a second time.

I suspect I'll be sending it to the editors on Friday. *crosses fingers...then goes and gets back to work.*


----------



## Nifelhein

Uk,

Since this is a preview you should not worry about changing it much, you can always do that later on, I thinkw e jsut can take some comments from you meant on what you are working to change on it and see how the whole is.

Don't get all over perfection, sometimes a mistake and a monster is better than no mistake and no monster.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Nifelhein said:
			
		

> Uk,




Hi Nifelhein matey! 



			
				Nifelhein said:
			
		

> Since this is a preview you should not worry about changing it much, you can always do that later on, I think we just can take some comments from you meant on what you are working to change on it and see how the whole is.
> 
> Don't get all over perfection, sometimes a mistake and a monster is better than no mistake and no monster.




Well a couple of things. I am bit of a perfectionist I suppose, which means you wait longer but its better in the end. 

Even with the preview I don't like the idea of turning in some slipshod (in my eyes) peice of work. I mean I have even had to restrain myself from continually wanting to add more and more elements to the document (I think there are about 2 dozen new artifacts and half a dozen each new epic spells, epic feats and new weapon special abilities in the preview alone).

There is a lot more in the Bestiary preview than you might think. The infinite size tables, how to use mass for determining weapon damage, an updated section on physical design parameters - specifically linked to size, a brief look at the dimensions; their rulers and inhabitants, revised rules for Abomination creation (up to Titanic size), sections on Angelic, Brood (aka Slaad), Daemonic, Demonic and Diabolic Hierarchies. A section on Dire Animals and how to stack those templates (with two unique mythological monster examples, and two non-unique). Epic and Adamic Dragons and a section on how to create dragons. Four of the golems have six variants (from Medium to Titanic size).

Also even though its technically only 86 pages, the font and margins used are the same size as the 3.5 core rulebooks. So its not like your typical third party stuff where they try and spread things out to up the page count, Even though each entry has its own page(s) they are all filled to the brim.


----------



## Anabstercorian

My threat stands - May or nuthin'.


----------



## Fieari

Looks like you've got a case of the 90/10 rule.  First 90% of the job takes 90% of the time.  Last 10% of the job takes the other 90% of the time.

Honestly though Krust, although we criticize software companies for doing this... release a buggy product now, patch it later.  Make use of errata.  We'll be forgiving for the preview.  Heck, I -expect- bugs in a beta, and if I don't find bugs, I wonder why they call it a beta!  I know you're a perfectionist... but just let a few mistakes go now.  It can't possibly be as bad as you think.  Allow Linus's Law to come into play.

Let it go to the editor.  Keep working on it while it's at the editor's, but don't add your additions and modifications to the _preview_... make it available as errata or just include it in the full volume only.  Otherwise obviously you can keep going forever.  Eventually, something needs to be released.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Anabstercorian mate! 



			
				Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> My threat stands - May or nuthin'.




I know dude.

...I assume that was the end of May though...right.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Fieari dude! 



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> Looks like you've got a case of the 90/10 rule.  First 90% of the job takes 90% of the time.  Last 10% of the job takes the other 90% of the time.




Thats probably a fair appraisal.



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> Honestly though Krust, although we criticize software companies for doing this... release a buggy product now, patch it later.  Make use of errata.  We'll be forgiving for the preview.  Heck, I -expect- bugs in a beta, and if I don't find bugs, I wonder why they call it a beta!  I know you're a perfectionist... but just let a few mistakes go now.  It can't possibly be as bad as you think.  Allow Linus's Law to come into play.
> 
> Let it go to the editor.  Keep working on it while it's at the editor's, but don't add your additions and modifications to the _preview_... make it available as errata or just include it in the full volume only.  Otherwise obviously you can keep going forever.  Eventually, something needs to be released.




Well I think it will go to the editor on Friday regardless of whether or not its 100% in my mind.


----------



## Knight Otu

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Well I think it will go to the editor on Friday regardless of whether or not its 100% in my mind.




That's a good idea. While its good to make the editor's job easier, you shouldn't make the editor's job.


----------



## Anabstercorian

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Hey Anabstercorian mate!
> I know dude.
> ...I assume that was the end of May though...right.




...We'll go with that.


----------



## Baronovan

I'm still on your side, UK, but I think a pre-release is just that: an imperfect copy. Let your editor do something for an afternoon, eh?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Baranovan matey! 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> I'm still on your side, UK, but I think a pre-release is just that: an imperfect copy. Let your editor do something for an afternoon, eh?




I think its going to take the editor a tad longer than an afternoon to check. 

By the way I finally got all my stuff at home sorted today, so things should be going smoother from now on, although todays events actually slowed progress, so I didn't really geta full days work on the preview. I have a checklist of 151 things* that needed fixing on the Bestiary Preview and I am currently working my way through those.

*Some as innocuous as what spell is used in the creation for a new weapon special ability (sounds easy doesn't it), most are one sentence or ability that needs fixed, or create a new/better adventure idea for monster 'x', about a half a dozen are powers I just haven't been able to sort out properly (like the aforementioned cometary dragon breath weapon).

I'll know by tomorrow how many I'll cross off before things will head to the editors.


----------



## Sledge

It's friday


----------



## Zhnov

Howdy UK!



			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> I'll know by tomorrow how many I'll cross off before things will head to the editors.




Congrats on getting the Bestiary Preview to the home stretch!  Checkered flag in view!

~Zhnov


----------



## Upper_Krust

Zhnov said:
			
		

> Howdy UK!




Hi Zhnov dude (and hey Sledge mate). 



			
				Zhnov said:
			
		

> Congrats on getting the Bestiary Preview to the home stretch!  Checkered flag in view!




Thanks. I actually haven't gotten it to the editor as yet, I haven't been able to get on the computer for the past 36+ hours (due to a number of pressing engagements that had to be kept) and I still want to put in about another 3 or 4 hours before I send it - but I will be okay for doing that tomorrow...for definite this time.


----------



## Sledge

YAY.  Can't wait.  My level 42 game is just gunning for this. 
Now we just need to apply the cat'o'ninetails to the editor.


----------



## Cheiromancer

Who is the editor? Do we know this, or is it still hush-hush?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hiya Sledge dude! 



			
				Sledge said:
			
		

> YAY. Can't wait. My level 42 game is just gunning for this.




There are about 7 entries in the bestiary preview that would be notably beyond the current scope of your campaign, but the other 28 or so should give you good mileage.



			
				Sledge said:
			
		

> Now we just need to apply the cat'o'ninetails to the editor.




I think its I, rather than the editor that needs a kick in the pants.   

Hey Cheiromancer mate! 



			
				Cheiromancer said:
			
		

> Who is the editor? Do we know this, or is it still hush-hush?




Well the name will be in the credits so you won't have to wait that long to find out.


----------



## Knight Otu

So, is it already on its way to the editor?


----------



## Sledge

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> I think its I, rather than the editor that needs a kick in the pants.



If you say so.  Get working on the next release!!  

 
really I'll just be happy to see something finally.


----------



## historian

Hey U_K!  

I was wondering whether you had named (or settled on the names of) the First Ones, are there going to be 4 or 5, etc?

Thanks.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey all! 



			
				Knight Otu said:
			
		

> So, is it already on its way to the editor?




Not quite. Today was the first day of the rest of my life (I couldn't really get on the computer Sunday and Monday). I should be close to having things wrapped up tonight. *he almost says as if he hasn't said that before a dozen times*. 



			
				Sledge said:
			
		

> If you say so. Get working on the next release!!




I must admit I am looking forward to getting back to the Immortals Handbook proper after the Bestiary.



			
				Sledge said:
			
		

> really I'll just be happy to see something finally.




You and me both.



			
				historian said:
			
		

> I was wondering whether you had named (or settled on the names of) the First Ones, are there going to be 4 or 5, etc?




There are six, they are all listed in the Bestiary Preview (pages 8-9) where I briefly (three columns) discuss the various dimensions and inhabitants.


----------



## historian

Hey U_K!  




> There are six [First Ones], they are all listed in the Bestiary Preview (pages 8-9) where I briefly (three columns) discuss the various dimensions and inhabitants.




 

Order, Chaos, Good, Evil, Neutrality, and?

I'm really looking forward to getting a look at this stuff (the interplay between dimensions/planes, etc.) and getting a better grip on the cosmology.

BTW, I've been reviewing your spell system outlined in this thread.  The simplicity is very cool.  Given that certain spells can become extremely powerful (at 41st level, a maximized, empowered (x15) Horrid Wilting spell would do 1700 dase damage!), it's going to be interesting to see what Divine/Cosmic/Transcendent abilities offer in order to keep pace.


----------



## CRGreathouse

historian said:
			
		

> Given that certain spells can become extremely powerful (at 41st level, a maximized, empowered (x15) Horrid Wilting spell would do 1700 dase damage!), it's going to be interesting to see what Divine/Cosmic/Transcendent abilities offer in order to keep pace.




A Maximized, Empowered (x15) _horrid wilting_ would deal 7.5 * 20d6 + 120 damage, for an average of 645 damage or so.


----------



## Upper_Krust

historian said:
			
		

> Hey U_K!




Hiya mate! 



			
				historian said:
			
		

> Order, Chaos, Good, Evil, Neutrality, and?




...the other one. 

By the way the above is probably more along the lines of Time, Thought, Spirit, Matter and Fate.



			
				historian said:
			
		

> I'm really looking forward to getting a look at this stuff (the interplay between dimensions/planes, etc.) and getting a better grip on the cosmology.




Well the Bestiary only gives a glimpse, but it should be enough to whet appetites. I'll go into more details in the IH proper.

I do have to say that the way I have the dimensions set up is quite simply perfection, but you can all make up your own minds soon enough.



			
				historian said:
			
		

> BTW, I've been reviewing your spell system outlined in this thread.  The simplicity is very cool.




Thank you. 

Not as cool as when you add dimensional magic to it. 



			
				historian said:
			
		

> Given that certain spells can become extremely powerful (at 41st level, a maximized, empowered (x15) Horrid Wilting spell would do 1700 dase damage!),




Remember that in the Grimoire I also have to introduce true high levels spells and retrofit all the epic spells to the new system (which is actually very easy).



			
				historian said:
			
		

> it's going to be interesting to see what Divine/Cosmic/Transcendent abilities offer in order to keep pace.




Well its generally things you can't do at the preceeding level, there are no abilities that are simply powered up versions of weaker abilities because the way I design them I just assume they all stack anyway. Same with magic spells.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey CRGreathouse matey! 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> A Maximized, Empowered (x15) _horrid wilting_ would deal 7.5 * 20d6 + 120 damage, for an average of 645 damage or so.




1020 as far as I can see.

20d6 maximised = 120.

x15 empowerments = +750% (Total 850%)

120 x 8.5 = 1020


----------



## Knight Otu

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> ...the other one.
> 
> By the way the above is probably more along the lines of Time, Thought, Spirit, Matter and Fate.




Nr 6 - Space? (Or would that be Matter?) Action?



> 1020 as far as I can see.
> 20d6 maximised = 120.
> x15 empowerments = +750% (Total 850%)
> 120 x 8.5 = 1020



IIRC, Empower and Maximize do not "see" each other. An Empower adds half again the random amount (20d6). Maximize does its work on the normal portion of the spell, not the Empowered portion. *checks* Yep, that's what it says in the PHB.


----------



## historian

Hey U_K!  



> By the way the above is probably more along the lines of Time, Thought, Spirit, Matter and Fate.




IG = space (matter), time (time), thought (mind), soul (spirit), reality (fate), and power (energy?).

Maybe that's more like it?  It's the dimensions beyond the initial 6 that really have me puzzled.



> I do have to say that the way I have the dimensions set up is quite simply perfection, but you can all make up your own minds soon enough.




Show me man!  



> 1020 as far as I can see.
> 
> _20d6_ maximised = 120.
> 
> x15 empowerments = +750% (Total 850%)
> 
> 120 x 8.5 = 1020




I should really learn to check the core rules to make sure that I have the base spell right.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Heya mate! 



			
				Knight Otu said:
			
		

> Nr 6 - Space? (Or would that be Matter?) Action?




No. 



			
				Knight Otu said:
			
		

> IIRC, Empower and Maximize do not "see" each other. An Empower adds half again the random amount (20d6). Maximize does its work on the normal portion of the spell, not the Empowered portion. *checks* Yep, that's what it says in the PHB.




Whereabouts in the PHB does it say that (I just looked and didn't see it).

Seems you were right though CRGreathouse mate. 

Statistically it probably makes sense looking over the figures. Although that Intensify Spell epic feat is just going to bloody annoy me now.


----------



## Knight Otu

It's in the last sentence/paragraph of the Maximize Spell feat description (pg 83 in 3.0/pg 98 in 3.5). The 3.5 one describes it a bit better.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Seems you were right though CRGreathouse mate.


----------



## devilish

So .. IH has gone to the editor.  Should I be getting gooseflesh at this
point or go back into hibernation?  (please gooseflesh, please gooseflesh!)

[EDIT]  Oops.... I didn't see post 206.  Wasn't trying to be cheeky, was 
honestly getting excited.


----------



## Sledge

Well it's friday again.  Are we there yet?


----------



## Alzrius

Hey U_K. Been a while.

I was just checking out the new preview of the IH, and wanted to share a thought I had.

You suggest that Automatic Metamagic Capacity should replace Improved Spell Capacity. Now, in most regards, I agree. However, there's one thing that ISC has that AMC does not. With Improved Spell Capacity, you actually gain the ability to cast spells of a higher level. For example, a Ranger could actually cast 5th-level spells.

Now, ordinarily, this won't mean anything, as there are no 5th-level Ranger spells printed anywhere. But there are examples of spells that can be used in any slot. Namely, the sanctified and vile spells from, respectively, the BoED and BoVD. ISC lets characters with limited spellcasting such as Bards, Paladins, and Rangers cast the higher levels of those, whereas AMC doesn't.


----------



## Sledge

That and Arcane Disciple the feat that lets you add a list of spells to your class list.  This would also allow higher level spells than normal if the classes could cast that high.  Having said that neither of these options are OGC so it would be awkward for UK to provide a method of dealing with these.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Alzrius said:
			
		

> Hey U_K. Been a while.




Hi Alzrius mate! 

I trust you have been keeping well?



			
				Alzrius said:
			
		

> I was just checking out the new preview of the IH, and wanted to share a thought I had.




Fire away.



			
				Alzrius said:
			
		

> You suggest that Automatic Metamagic Capacity should replace Improved Spell Capacity.




Yes.



			
				Alzrius said:
			
		

> Now, in most regards, I agree. However, there's one thing that ISC has that AMC does not. With Improved Spell Capacity, you actually gain the ability to cast spells of a higher level. For example, a Ranger could actually cast 5th-level spells.




Yes but lets look at that logically, what epic Ranger (or Paladin) is going to bother with the Improved Spell Capacity (or Automatic Metamagic Capacity) feat?

You would be better off with a ring of spell storing even.



			
				Alzrius said:
			
		

> Now, ordinarily, this won't mean anything, as there are no 5th-level Ranger spells printed anywhere. But there are examples of spells that can be used in any slot. Namely, the sanctified and vile spells from, respectively, the BoED and BoVD. ISC lets characters with limited spellcasting such as Bards, Paladins, and Rangers cast the higher levels of those, whereas AMC doesn't.




Well I don't really want to divulge the secrets of dimensional magic* but it pretty much alleviates the problems you mention, so you could even have Rangers casting high-level Druid spells if you wanted.

*Although secrets is probably too strong a word for what is really simple (think AMC type simple) but really cool ideas. In fact its so simple I wonder why no one else has thought of it before now! Suffice to say its 6 different epic magic system flavours (if you will) all of which can be explained under one feat (as with Automatic Metamagic Capacity or Metamagic Freedom). Thats how easy its is to implement, compare that to the cumbersome epic magic system and theres no contest I believe. 

One of the keys to making epic games fun is going to be getting the prep time down to a bare minimum. I think my magic system does just that perfectly. You could even use the dimensional magic feats at non-epic levels, or weave them into prestige classes for added flavour.

...then of course you can combine dimensional magics...and thats when the real high level stuff begins.


----------



## Anabstercorian

It's almost May 1st!  You better finish up that beastiary by the end of May or no amount of honeyed words will convince me your work habits have improved for the better, and I will forsake your empty promises.


----------



## Sledge

Yeah um so do we have any confirmation about how long this will take the editor?
My wife goes into surgery on the 12th and I'm sure we will be playing before then.  I would like to be playing with some of the rules I've been reading all codified.


----------



## Dyson

Ya know, I don't even think there's a book anymore and this whole thing is just a hoax.


----------



## poilbrun

Dyson said:
			
		

> Ya know, I don't even think there's a book anymore and this whole thing is just a hoax.



Wow, Dyson, I didn't even know your evil was spreading over these parts! Foolish me, believing Dicefreaks could contain one such as you!


----------



## Dyson

poilbrun said:
			
		

> Wow, Dyson, I didn't even know your evil was spreading over these parts! Foolish me, believing Dicefreaks could contain one such as you!




Who are you?


----------



## poilbrun

Dyson said:
			
		

> Who are you?



 My nick here is the same as on Dicefreaks, but I more of a lurker there... Such as I am here, come to think of it. Anyway, my posts over there do not attract the kind of attention yours do


----------



## Dyson

Wow...even lurkers fear me. I didn;t know I affected the pansy's!. OH!

The Diceman cometh.


----------



## devilish

Dyson said:
			
		

> Ya know, I don't even think there's a book anymore and this whole thing is just a hoax.




Coincidentally, that's my thought on the ninth chapter on the Gates of Hell.


----------



## Baronovan

Trust me, devilish, Chapter 9 is not a hoax. I just looked over Dispater and have started helping out on the finishing touches for Mammon. It's in the works. It won't be much longer.


----------



## Dyson

devilish said:
			
		

> Coincidentally, that's my thought on the ninth chapter on the Gates of Hell.




Yeah, but at least that's the only part of their book that they're waiting on. Wanna make sure all the big boys are right. What have we gotten from IH? Definately not 8/9ths of his book. So next time you wanna compare make sure you choose two apples, not an apple and an ashtray.

Look, let's be reasonable. This book has been talked about for what, 2 or 3 years? Maybe more. It's only been that long since i've known of it's supposed existance. Let's also look at all the things to have been shown to us from UK about his book.

1) Monster builds for some more mythological characters.
2) An apendix, which all it did was leave questions unanswered and conjured up more questions to be thought of. But it did leave us with a taste of what (at the time) seemed like a very neat system. More logical.
3) Descriptions to some feats.

Now let's se what Gates has givin you.
1) Chapter one
2) Chapter two
3) Chapter three
4) Chapter four
5) Chapter five
6) Chapter six
7) Chapter seven
8) Chapter eight
9) Templates that the creator himself has put out in public before his book ever came out. So you can make your own Demogorgon and not wait for his.
10) Most of teh creatures in chaptor 9 were previously posted, all we're waiting for is the complilation and whatever tweeks have been made since. But most of the entities are already posted.
11) Didn't TAKE 3 YEARS. The templates were concieved and only later was the book idea handled. And since that birth it's only been a year. Three times the time. Maybe putting some help on his book would increase the production.
12) No secrecy.


My point is this.....for so much talk for so long. I think it's crap. I think he wanted to be thought of as a good designer around the boards, made up some junk to get us flock to him, and just periodically makes up stuff to give us the impression of 'work' being done. 

It's a damned hoax.


----------



## Dyson

Which also reminds me. I've said this was a hoax two days ago.....where is he now?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey there.



			
				Dyson said:
			
		

> Which also reminds me. I've said this was a hoax two days ago.....where is he now?




Right here.  



			
				Dyson said:
			
		

> Yeah, but at least that's the only part of their book that they're waiting on. Wanna make sure all the big boys are right. What have we gotten from IH? Definately not 8/9ths of his book.




...and how many people are working on GoH? Is there art in it (I don't remember seeing any in the downloads, I apologise if I am mistaken)?



			
				Dyson said:
			
		

> So next time you wanna compare make sure you choose two apples, not an apple and an ashtray.




That seems overly spiteful, given that, by your own admission, you only have a casual knowledge of my work.



			
				Dyson said:
			
		

> Look, let's be reasonable. This book has been talked about for what, 2 or 3 years? Maybe more. It's only been that long since i've known of it's supposed existance. Let's also look at all the things to have been shown to us from UK about his book.




Fire away.



			
				Dyson said:
			
		

> 1) Monster builds for some more mythological characters.
> 2) An apendix, which all it did was leave questions unanswered and conjured up more questions to be thought of. But it did leave us with a taste of what (at the time) seemed like a very neat system. More logical.
> 3) Descriptions to some feats.




I presume you are refering to what is quite siimply the most definitive Challenge Rating System, Encounter Level Revision and Class Building Mechanic on the internet. Adopted by Bad Axe Games for their acclaimed Grim Tales book.

Admittedly you neglected to mention my website. 



			
				Dyson said:
			
		

> Now let's se what Gates has givin you.
> 1) Chapter one
> 2) Chapter two
> 3) Chapter three
> 4) Chapter four
> 5) Chapter five
> 6) Chapter six
> 7) Chapter seven
> 8) Chapter eight
> 9) Templates that the creator himself has put out in public before his book ever came out. So you can make your own Demogorgon and not wait for his.
> 10) Most of teh creatures in chaptor 9 were previously posted, all we're waiting for is the complilation and whatever tweeks have been made since. But most of the entities are already posted.
> 11) Didn't TAKE 3 YEARS. The templates were concieved and only later was the book idea handled. And since that birth it's only been a year. Three times the time. Maybe putting some help on his book would increase the production.




...and essentially how many man-years of work have they already put in on GoH?



			
				Dyson said:
			
		

> 12) No secrecy.




I don't remember not answering a pertinent question about the IH. What would you like to know? 



			
				Dyson said:
			
		

> My point is this.....for so much talk for so long. I think it's crap.




Well you're entitled to your opinion, but I don't remember asking anyone to devote time or money as yet.



			
				Dyson said:
			
		

> I think he wanted to be thought of as a good designer around the boards, made up some junk to get us flock to him,




What junk is this exactly?



			
				Dyson said:
			
		

> and just periodically makes up stuff to give us the impression of 'work' being done. It's a damned hoax.




Well I hope you are hungry because you are going to be eating a lot of words shortly.


----------



## Dragonblade

I have had my eye on this for a long time now. How far away are you from a print version of this?

I totally want this book.


----------



## historian

Agree w/U_K.

I've noticed a strong bit of negativity in this thread lately, and it's frankly embarrasing.  While U_K has (by his own admission) missed deadlines, I believe any failure there is largely self-imposed in the hopes that he delivers something that better gels with 3.5 ed.'s crunchy rules.  Nevertheless, I haven't noticed a material alteration to the _concept_ since the inception of his posts.  While I wish as much as anyone that U_K would release everything, even if only in draft form, I understand his reasons for not doing so.

Apparently, Dyson's intent is to either: (1) light a fire under U_K's rear so that things are wrapped up (understandable from a thematic standpoint); or to (2) simply detract from U_K's considerable efforts to date and the IH generally (wholly unjustifiable).

Dyson, if you have anything constructive to add, I (and I suspect everyone frequenting this post) would love to view it.  Otherwise, as a serious viewer of the substantive material in this thread, I would appreciate if you declined to share it.


----------



## Campbell

UK Mate, 

I just wanted to offer you my gratitude for your CR/EL Document. No supplemental material, perhaps with the exception of die_kluge's Artificer's, has had a more significant impact on my game.

Dyson,

I am sorry you feel the way you do about Upper Krust. Perhaps you could offer us your take on revising the divinity rules put forth by WotC. In general, I'd prefer if we could remain civil. I've enjoyed the work that you and others have put into Gates, and I'm fairly certain that you are indeed a mature, intelligent, rational human being. If you don't believe Upper Krust can deliver on the promises he's made that's fine, but there is little need to resort to name calling.


----------



## Baronovan

Grim Tales was a good book. But didn't I only see your name in the playtester's credits, UK? I don't recall (I could be wrong) seeing you listed as a developer. I was wondering about that when I flipped through the book on the aisle since it was clearly your system in the appendices.


----------



## Campbell

Baronovan said:
			
		

> Grim Tales was a good book. But didn't I only see your name in the playtester's credits, UK? I don't recall (I could be wrong) seeing you listed as a developer. I was wondering about that when I flipped through the book on the aisle since it was clearly your system in the appendices.




UK aka Craig cochrane is credited in the OGL License copyright notice section.



			
				OGL said:
			
		

> _Challenging Challenge Ratings: Immortals Handbook _Copyright 2003, Craig Cochrane
> _Encountering Encounter Levels: Immortals Handbook _Copyright 2003, Craig Cochrane
> _Design Parameters: Immortal's Handbook _Copyright 2003, Craig Cochrane


----------



## Dyson

Historian, no you're pretty much right. I'm tired of all the talk and just want something to be done. And if someone expresses some disapointment in the organization process then maybe he might be inclined to work harder knowing that he is losing hopeful purchaser's of his material.


Campbell,
Honestly, my take?.....D&DG isn't that bad. Regardless of most of the mechanics, looking at what it represents, it fits just fine. It's only problem is it's lack of integration with the ELH. More epic Dieties would make for so much more power. That alone is the biggest step in fixing Dieties. 

Name calling? I didn't call anybody anything. I said this was a hoax.


----------



## Baronovan

Campbell said:
			
		

> UK aka Craig cochrane is credited in the OGL License copyright notice section.




Okay, cool. I only gave it a cursory glance at the store where I work.


----------



## Campbell

Dyson said:
			
		

> Campbell,
> Honestly, my take?.....D&DG isn't that bad. Regardless of most of the mechanics, looking at what it represents, it fits just fine. It's only problem is it's lack of integration with the ELH. More epic Dieties would make for so much more power. That alone is the biggest step in fixing Dieties.
> 
> Name calling? I didn't call anybody anything. I said this was a hoax.




Dyson;
I'm quite sorry. I know I was overly agressive, but it seemed like you were stepping outside the bounds of polite communication, and I've been a tad overstimulated lately. As far as the D&Dg mechanics go, I do think there are problems with the mechanics, mainly that the threat level posed by dieties of varying Divine Rank becomes almost impossible to measure, which can be problematic if you want to play a game involving PC dieties. D&Dg also introduces rules components that step on the toes of way too many standard rules. As far as I'm concerned shoddy mechanics are still shoddy mechanics even if they never come into play. Additionally, I am in agreement over the lack of integration with the ELH.

As far as name calling goes, I guess this is what really set me off.


> Wow...even lurkers fear me. I didn;t know I affected the pansy's!. OH!




I'll be good now. I promise.


----------



## Plane Sailing

Dyson said:
			
		

> Name calling? I didn't call anybody anything. I said this was a hoax.




Dyson, please remain civil. You tone has been particularly aggressive on this thread recently. By all means make your points, but take the time to frame them in such a way as not to impugne other members of the community.

Regards,


----------



## Sledge

So now that editing apparently has the files, can we open the betting/contest again?


----------



## Baronovan

I put my proverbial money on... May 30th, at the earliest, for the current material to come back from the editor.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Baronovan said:
			
		

> I put my proverbial money on... May 30th, at the earliest, for the current material to come back from the editor.




That may be reasonable, although it of course depends on U_K -- as far as I know he hasn't sent it off yet.

Once he does, though, he can work on Part II while the editor works.  Hopefully this won't take as long as Part I!


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey all! 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> That may be reasonable, although it of course depends on U_K -- as far as I know he hasn't sent it off yet.
> 
> Once he does, though, he can work on Part II while the editor works.  Hopefully this won't take as long as Part I!




I emailed the editor today.

I'm guessing that if people were in a real hurry to see things I could probably make the Bestiary preview text available perhaps as early as Monday (pending the initial reply from the editor) with a version including all the art to follow possibly by next Friday (which may turn out to be a good thing as it would also give me a chance to rework some of the pieces I am unhappy with...such as the Anakim).

As for part two, certainly it will go much, much faster. In terms of text I think I can now handle about 11 pages per week and most of the entries are already part written so maybe double that. So the text may take about 3 1/2 weeks, and probably another 1 1/2 weeks for the art.

So assuming the preview is fully finished by next Friday...the 13th. The full Bestiary should be ready roughly by mid-late June.

Although of course the novelty there would be me able to adhere to a deadline for once.


----------



## Sledge

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> I'm guessing that if people were in a real hurry to see things I could probably make the Bestiary preview text available perhaps as early as Monday (pending the initial reply from the editor)



That would so entirely and completely rock.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Sledge! 



			
				Sledge said:
			
		

> That would so entirely and completely rock.




Well the more I think about it may be unfair to the editor. It assumes he can edit the entire document in three days (including over the weekend at that). I don't really know if thats even feasible, let alone realistic? So I'll wait until we can talk about things before jumping to conclusions. But be assured it won't be too much longer to wait.

I'll be really interested to hear the feedback to the preview, believe it or not I actually toned down quite a few of the monsters, thats not to say they are not tough - simply that they are not as min/maxed as they could have been.


----------



## Baronovan

Looking forward to it. Will you be making any appearances at the new Dicefreaks to let those guys know when the preview is released?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Baranovan! 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Looking forward to it. Will you be making any appearances at the new Dicefreaks to let those guys know when the preview is released?




You mean they don't all think its a hoax!   

I don't know, I'll maybe wait until I have the full Bestiary ready before pimping anything. Though I'd happily respond to threads started by other people who have seen the preview material I guess.

Incidently, its probably not the place for it (?) but here is a small snippet of text that got cut from the Preview. I was never sure if I could get away with mentioning the Wasting Tower directly anyway.   



			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> *The Wasting Tower*
> 
> This macro-titanic edifice is the center of power for all daemonkind. The towers exact origins are unknown, although the venerable maskim are said to have been alive during the towers construction and whisper that sinistral overgods summoned a mega-being from beyond reality in the first war against the angels. However the mindless entity could not be controlled and ran amok. Forced into battling the creature, in a conflict where even overgods met their end, the monstrosity was eventually laid low. Over time the carcass of the great beast decayed and rotted, forever blighting the plane of Hades. Only the bones now remain, with the wasting tower being created from the creatures spine.
> 
> Over the eons the tower has inspired daemonic architects and broken the backs of the billions of slaves that have laboured upon it. The tower reputedly has some ten thousand levels, with roughly half above ground and half below.


----------



## The Serge

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> You mean they don't all think its a hoax!



Dyson's... special, U_K.  He's not a moderator or an admin at DF, so don't take his comments as a reflection of the entire site.  It's best to just ignore him when he's being silly.    I can assure you that we are all very interested in _The Immortals Handbook_.


----------



## Dyson

I've been planning to state the samething, only to get to my computer now. Knowing that I stated DF I didn't want my words to reflect anything of the site itself.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Serge mate! 



			
				The Serge said:
			
		

> Dyson's... special, U_K.  He's not a moderator or an admin at DF, so don't take his comments as a reflection of the entire site.  It's best to just ignore him when he's being silly.




His points were probably valid, his manner a touch heavy handed, but I appreciate his passion on the matter nonetheless.



			
				The Serge said:
			
		

> I can assure you that we are all very interested in _The Immortals Handbook_.




You know I think when the Immortals Handbook (Bestiary preview even) comes out and Chapter Nine of Gates of Hell is done we can have some interesting discussions on the hierarchy of the Hells my friend. I do have fond memories of threads we used to be involved in, many years ago over at the wizards boards about the nature of the outer planes. 

I stopped posting in such threads when I started working on the Immortals Handbook (which says how long ago it was!), but I have this universal theory, the seeds of which started back then, a sort of theory of everything you might say, kosmically speaking, that ties everything together that I think people will get a kick out of. It ties in the kabbalah/sephiroth; quintessence; the book of Enoch; sanskrit spiritualism and chakras; the occult ages of man (eg. Atlantis); real world dimensional theory (I kid you not); the celestial order; the zodiac (people will love what I have done with this); elements of the Devachan; the Guardian Wall; Karma; the quartenary/ternary; Tarot, and a few other surprises all wrapped up in one simple package.  

A small portion of which outlines how you determine the hierarchies of each plane using numerology and the relationship between councils (political groups of gods), pantheons (social groups of gods), dynasties (racial groups of gods), the hierarchies (aligned groups of immortal spirits, eg. demons) and so forth. 

I hope people will find it as useful a philosophical building tool, as the challenge rating stuff was a mechanical tool. 

Like I said, it will be interesting, for me, to be involved in such debates again. I love all that stuff, and its something I have missed a bit.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Sledge said:
			
		

> Now we just need to apply the cat'o'ninetails to the editor.




Please don't.  The editor doesn't have a very good Con, and he might not be able to do his job properly under those circumstances.  



			
				Cheiromancer said:
			
		

> Who is the editor? Do we know this, or is it still hush-hush?




I will be the editor for the Immortal's Handbook.  I'm a real perfectionist when it comes to the rules (and to grammar), but I'm also reasonably fast.

You can see some of my past editing work at Silverthorne Games if you're curious.



			
				Dyson said:
			
		

> Ya know, I don't even think there's a book anymore and this whole thing is just a hoax.






Let's put some money on this, shall we?


----------



## Sledge

CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> Please don't.  The editor doesn't have a very good Con, and he might not be able to do his job properly under those circumstances.



Kitten of 3 fuzzy tails? 

So are you done yet?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Sledge! 



			
				Sledge said:
			
		

> Kitten of 3 fuzzy tails?




The tickling might distract him.



			
				Sledge said:
			
		

> So are you done yet?




If I can answer this one for him, we (meaning me and the editor) are guestimating about 10 days time or thereabouts. So while hes working on the editing, I can finish off the art.


----------



## Yair

I say June 20th for the Preview, June 2006 for the Bestiary. And I'll stake a cat with nine fuzzy tails on that.


----------



## Sledge

Okay well I guess I get to start mining the thread for stuff for the game on tuesday or wednesday.  I'll let you two work at it for a few days without more threats of cartoon violence.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Sledge said:
			
		

> So are you done yet?




There are still things that need to be done, both on my side and on Craig's.  He wants to rewrite some prose and make other minor changes, and I don't know how far he is on the illustrations.  (My editing copy is art-free.)

Ordinarily, a product like this might take 3-4 weeks from where it is now to sale as a PDF.  In this case the layout is already done, which will halve the time needed (more or less).  Assuming there are no serious delays, we should be able to put the preview out by the 20th -- although this depends on Craig as much as me.


----------



## Aquarius Alodar

Hmmm..... :\ ....As I was going to say, the consequences of this topic slipping off the front page frankly do *not* bear thinking about. Therefore, I am putting in a Bump to help support it.


----------



## Knight Otu

Well, but bumping won't make the two work faster.

*tries to slip some virtual bribe to CRG*


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey all! 

Small snippet of news. I have been working on the Challenge Ratings in the preview and it appears the spread is CR 9 (Force Guardian) to CR 1181 (Neutronium Golem).

When I get all the Challenge Ratings done I'll update the website with them.

Incidently, in the Preview I also have ghosted (grayed) target CRs for the monsters in the second half of the Bestiary. So you can get to see who is tougher than the Neutronium Golem and who would get vapourised by its pulsed x-ray attack.


----------



## Knight Otu

Guardian is your term for medium golems, right?


----------



## devilish

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> I stopped posting in such threads when I started working on the Immortals Handbook (which says how long ago it was!), but I have this universal theory, the seeds of which started back then, a sort of theory of everything you might say, kosmically speaking, that ties everything together that I think people will get a kick out of. It ties in the kabbalah/sephiroth; quintessence; the book of Enoch; sanskrit spiritualism and chakras; the occult ages of man (eg. Atlantis); real world dimensional theory (I kid you not); the celestial order; the zodiac (people will love what I have done with this); elements of the Devachan; the Guardian Wall; Karma; the quartenary/ternary; Tarot, and a few other surprises all wrapped up in one simple package.
> 
> A small portion of which outlines how you determine the hierarchies of each plane using numerology and the relationship between councils (political groups of gods), pantheons (social groups of gods), dynasties (racial groups of gods), the hierarchies (aligned groups of immortal spirits, eg. demons) and so forth.
> 
> I hope people will find it as useful a philosophical building tool, as the challenge rating stuff was a mechanical tool.




Wow!  I'm hyper-curious about this --- are you planning this in a future Immortals 
book or as a boards discussion?  

I don't want to distract you from your work now --- maybe we'll start a thread
after Bestiary Full is finished??


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hi Knight Otu mate! 



			
				Knight Otu said:
			
		

> Guardian is your term for medium golems, right?




Thats correct. Looking at the illustration for the Shield Guardian it looks more medium than large so I adopted that term. 

So four of the golem entries (Diamond, Force, Mercury and Orichalcum) have six variations ranging from medium to titanic. Each different class has a different ability (eg. the Diamond Colossi has the anti-magic field idea used in the ELH), with the 'golem' being the base version as it were.

The Ioun and Neutronium Golems only get the large version 'golem'. The Ioun Golem doesn't need any others because its a swarm, and the Neutronium Golem is just so powerful that I couldn't see people legitamately using things like Neutronium Colossi.

When I get the time I'll rustle up the Flesh, Clay, Stone and Iron versions of Guardians, Sentinels, Gargants, Colossi and Leviathans. Although to be honest they are so simple to extrapolate (when you see how the different classes relate to each other) that it wouldn't take very long to do them yourself. Or indeed extrapolate any golem for that matter (Mithril and Adamantite for instance from the ELH).


----------



## Knight Otu

How easy would  that be if the base golem isn't Large, such as, again, Mithril and Adamantine? Or do those two already fulfil the Qualities of a Sentinel?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey devilish dude! 



			
				devilish said:
			
		

> Wow!  I'm hyper-curious about this --- are you planning this in a future Immortals book or as a boards discussion?




There is a brief discussion of the dimensions in the Bestiary preview, so that will give you an introduction to the kosmos.

Obviously the main bulk of the work will unfold within the Immortals Handbook itself, and it won't be until there that I really start explaining things. The great thing about this big kosmic jigsaw is that its not just about mixing occult ideas and making sense of it all, in and of itself it has bred a lot of new ideas. So I have lots of really cool new stuff waiting in the wings. I am just bursting to tell you about some of them but I'll hold off for now.

Its like people know what a Pantheon (Social group of gods) is, and probably think a Dynasty (Racial group of gods) is simply my renaming what is essentially just still a Pantheon...but when I pull back the curtain I think people will love how everything starts to take on a new level of grandeur.  



			
				devilish said:
			
		

> I don't want to distract you from your work now --- maybe we'll start a thread after Bestiary Full is finished??




Sure okay.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hello again mate! 



			
				Knight Otu said:
			
		

> How easy would  that be if the base golem isn't Large, such as, again, Mithril and Adamantine?




Good point. Both those golems were really disappointing, I mean increasing the size was just lazy, and alacrity and trample hardly make them stand out. What the heck were WotC thinking!?

Anyway I digress. For the Mithril and Adamantite Golems I'd just let them retain the HD given but make them Large instead of Huge.



			
				Knight Otu said:
			
		

> Or do those two already fulfil the Qualities of a Sentinel?




No they don't.


----------



## Anabstercorian

Argh!  You better finish this before the end of May, because I REALLY wanna buy it!


----------



## S'mon

Hi Craig - great to hear your work is with the editor!  Good luck CR Greathouse!


----------



## CRGreathouse

S'mon said:
			
		

> Good luck CR Greathouse!




Thanks, I appreciate it.  I have two things to say about the Bestiary preview:
* It really needed an editor.    It *was* sprinkled with all kinds of things that would annoy people, especially those who pay close attention to mechanics.
* It's really good.  It's much better than the sample monsters, and it's packed with information.  Even if all the illustrations are stick figures I'd recommend getting it.

Of course, there will undoubtedly still be some mistakes in the final product that I've missed -- feel free to point them out!


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey S'mon! 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Hi Craig - great to hear your work is with the editor!




Indeed. The whole thing has been sitting on about 99% completion for a few weeks now, and I found myself having to grind out the last details. So I thought I would give it to the editor lest I spend another month pouring over minutiae.

Hey CRGreathouse! 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> Thanks, I appreciate it. I have two things to say about the Bestiary preview:
> * It really needed an editor.  It *was* sprinkled with all kinds of things that would annoy people, especially those who pay close attention to mechanics.




Thats why we have you! 

...though to be fair I did say you only had a 99% completed version, I mean I havent even read over the whole thing yet! 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> * It's really good. It's much better than the sample monsters, and it's packed with information.




There is A LOT of stuff in there beyond simply the monsters. 

Speaking of sample monsters I rewrote large chunks of the Amilictli and Anakim last night (for the preview) and I think they are now less of a mess.



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> Even if all the illustrations are stick figures I'd recommend getting it.




How did you get hold of the art!?!? 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> Of course, there will undoubtedly still be some mistakes in the final product that I've missed -- feel free to point them out!!




What happened to 'I don't make mistakes'?


----------



## Knight Otu

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> What happened to 'I don't make mistakes'?



Want a content reader? As it happens, I have a credit as a content reader for XRP's Beast Builder...


Note: Offer not fully serious.


----------



## historian

This is going to be very, very cool.



> I stopped posting in such threads when I started working on the Immortals Handbook (which says how long ago it was!), but I have this universal theory, the seeds of which started back then, a sort of theory of everything you might say, kosmically speaking, that ties everything together that I think people will get a kick out of. It ties in the kabbalah/sephiroth; quintessence; the book of Enoch; sanskrit spiritualism and chakras; the occult ages of man (eg. Atlantis); real world dimensional theory (I kid you not); the celestial order; the zodiac (people will love what I have done with this); elements of the Devachan; the Guardian Wall; Karma; the quartenary/ternary; Tarot, and a few other surprises all wrapped up in one simple package.




Can't wait!!



> Small snippet of news. I have been working on the Challenge Ratings in the preview and it appears the spread is CR 9 (Force Guardian) to CR 1181 (Neutronium Golem).
> 
> When I get all the Challenge Ratings done I'll update the website with them.
> 
> Incidently, in the Preview I also have ghosted (grayed) target CRs for the monsters in the second half of the Bestiary. So you can get to see who is tougher than the Neutronium Golem and who would get vapourised by its pulsed x-ray attack.




Historian = CR 2 (U_K scale, not WOTC).


----------



## CRGreathouse

historian said:
			
		

> Historian = CR 2 (U_K scale, not WOTC).




Actually, we're scaling the CRs to match WotC's scale, so a CR 20 in U_K's system should be comparable to a CR 20 in the MM.  Of course, some of the monsters in the MM are off as some undoubtedly are in the Bestiary: the Force Guardian seems a lot tougher than CR 9 to me.


----------



## historian

Thanks CRG.



> Actually, we're scaling the CRs to match WotC's scale, so a CR 20 in U_K's system should be comparable to a CR 20 in the MM.




I think that's more straightforward (apples to apples/less nomenclature).  Does that mean, however, that the Neutronium Golem is CR 1181 by WOTC's scale?


----------



## CRGreathouse

historian said:
			
		

> I think that's more straightforward (apples to apples/less nomenclature).  Does that mean, however, that the Neutronium Golem is CR 1181 by WOTC's scale?




This is my understanding.  Remember, I'm working off the 99% version -- mine has slightly different CRs for both of these monsters, as I recall.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey all! 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> Actually, we're scaling the CRs to match WotC's scale, so a CR 20 in U_K's system should be comparable to a CR 20 in the MM.




You'll still have the ECL listed (at the start of the book along with the CR list) as well as the CR and the Level adjustment, for those who use that approach, in each entry.

So don't worry, its all in there.

Remembering of course that ECL = my CR. Which you don't even need anyway since WotC CR is simply 2/3rds ECL/my CR.  So all you need do is multiply the CR x1.5.  



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> Of course, some of the monsters in the MM are off as some undoubtedly are in the Bestiary: the Force Guardian seems a lot tougher than CR 9 to me.




I think the problem may lie in its damage reduction (which is a wholly new type, for those in attendance), I could be undervaluing it...I'll look into it. In fact thinking about it, theres no way I would even want to have that as a cosmic power its so tough.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> I think the problem may lie in its damage reduction (which is a wholly new type, for those in attendance), I could be undervaluing it...I'll look into it. In fact thinking about it, theres no way I would even want to have that as a cosmic power its so tough.




Yep, I think you've hit on it there.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey CR Greathouse mate! 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> Yep, I think you've hit on it there.




Taking it as a Transcendental Ability the force guardian becomes CR 13, force golem CR 20 and so on.

Now all I have to work out is whether the Mercury Golems main ability is Transcendental or Omnific.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Now all I have to work out is whether the Mercury Golems main ability is Transcendental or Omnific.




Actually, I don't think it's as harsh as the Force Golem ability.  That's rough.


----------



## poilbrun

UK, CRG, could you take this talk to private messages, the teasing is killing me


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey guys! 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> Actually, I don't think it's as harsh as the Force Golem ability.




I think one is more powerful at relatively lower levels while the other is more powerful at relatively higher levels.



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> That's rough.




'Epic' even. 



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> UK, CRG, could you take this talk to private messages, the teasing is killing me.




Sure thing mate...from now on I mean. 

By the way everyone, poilbrun here is getting married this Saturday to his gorgeous girlfriend Isabelle. I'd just like to take this opportunity to wish them both the very best for the future. Maybe when hes sipping margaritas on the beach in Jamaica he'll spare a thought for his old mate krusty slaving over a hot keyboard.


----------



## historian

> By the way everyone, poilbrun here is getting married this Saturday to his gorgeous girlfriend Isabelle. I'd just like to take this opportunity to wish them both the very best for the future. Maybe when hes sipping margaritas on the beach in Jamaica he'll spare a thought for his old mate krusty slaving over a hot keyboard.




Congratulations!!!


----------



## Nifelhein

Hey, congratulations on the marriage poilbrun, may your lives be full of rpg sessions, healthy and deep sleeper children and lots of fun.


----------



## poilbrun

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Sure thing mate...from now on I mean.



I'm just kidding you, you know, but it was a bit frustrating reading about all those details while we haven't seen it yet... The _Now all I have to work out is whether the Mercury Golems main ability is Transcendental or Omnific._ part was really hard on me 



			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> By the way everyone, poilbrun here is getting married this Saturday to his gorgeous girlfriend Isabelle. I'd just like to take this opportunity to wish them both the very best for the future. Maybe when hes sipping margaritas on the beach in Jamaica he'll spare a thought for his old mate krusty slaving over a hot keyboard.



Thanks mate, and to anyone with good wishes! I'm sure I've met the half that was missing from me in Isabelle, and I hope our wedding will be the beginning of a wonderful life. And then it gives me a reason/excuse to take a two-week holiday in Jamaica!


----------



## Baronovan

Well, good luck, polibrun. We know what Dyson would say about marriage, though.


----------



## Upper_Krust

*Is Holy Word Broken!?*

Hey all! 



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> I'm sure I've met the half that was missing from me in Isabelle...




You smoothe tongued arch-devil you! 

Okay, I have been going over some stuff today and I think Holy Word is broken (at least at epic levels). I'm amazed I never spotted it before.

eg. At 30th-level you can kill any 20th-level character (of the appropriate alignment) with no save! The fact that its also an area spell means you can automatically kill any opponent 10 levels beneath you.

As I show with the CR/EL guide characters can still be threatened by opponents with as low as 1/4 their CR no matter the level. Holy Word is therefore in violation of this, and much too powerful at epic levels.

My initial nerfing of the spell is as follows, tell me what you think.

Equal Level - Deafened
-1 levels or less - Blinded
3/4 levels or less - paralysed
1/2 levels or less - killed


----------



## Dragonblade

So when is this book coming out and do we get a print version or just PDF?


----------



## Alzrius

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Okay, I have been going over some stuff today and I think Holy Word is broken (at least at epic levels). I'm amazed I never spotted it before.
> 
> eg. At 30th-level you can kill any 20th-level character (of the appropriate alignment) with no save! The fact that its also an area spell means you can automatically kill any opponent 10 levels beneath you.
> 
> As I show with the CR/EL guide characters can still be threatened by opponents with as low as 1/4 their CR no matter the level. Holy Word is therefore in violation of this, and much too powerful at epic levels.
> 
> My initial nerfing of the spell is as follows, tell me what you think.
> 
> Equal Level - Deafened
> -1 levels or less - Blinded
> 3/4 levels or less - paralysed
> 1/2 levels or less - killed




I'm willing to take this at face value.


----------



## Fieari

At lower levels this is actually a buff... Holy Word can generally be attained at 14th level, meaning that when you first get it, normally it kills 4 HD things, but now 7HD things, for a difference of 3HD.  That's a fairly significant buff... I can imagine throwing some 7HD creatures at an ECL14 party, especially if I threw a LOT of 7HD things at them at once.

Perhaps there's some way to word it that they must be at -least- 10HD below your level, but then use the more relative scaling when 1/2 you HD is greater than 10?  The concept is simple enough, but wording it may be tricky...


----------



## Baronovan

This issue hit Dicefreaks like a wave some months ago. I think there were a few solutions, but the best one (IMO) was to simply add the death descriptor to the spell's slaying effect, thereby allowing _death ward_ to thwart it.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey there Dragonblade! 



			
				Dragonblade said:
			
		

> So when is this book coming out and do we get a print version or just PDF?




Well its going to be pdf initially (fingers crossed before the end of the month). 

I'd like to get the full Bestiary completed before having a print version. So you are talking 5-6 weeks to get that finished in all likelihood.

How long the print version of the Bestiary (likely to be standalone now rather than part of the Immortals Handbook itself) takes after that is unknown to me and I would just be guessing.

I doubt I can now fit the Bestiary into an Immortals Handbook all in one 'bible' if you will without things exceeding 450 pages, which seems a bit unrealistic.

So the two halfs of the Bestiary will probably both weigh in at about 90 pages each (total page count 180).

I'll probably kick that up to 192 pages for the print version, which will be a standalone product.

Perhaps with a 96 page 'booster' Epic Bestiary 2 somewhere down the line with about another 45 or so monsters.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hi guys! 



			
				Alzrius said:
			
		

> I'm willing to take this at face value.




Appreciate the love dude. 



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> At lower levels this is actually a buff...




True, but I don't see it as a major problem. Also remember I said the spell was broken at epic levels, not core levels. So worst case scenario only use my version at epic levels.

The key to my solution lay in the destructive ability of turn undead. When you have twice the number of levels you destroy rather than turn undead. So thats why I set the base effect at 1/2. Its also equal to the spell at 20th-level.



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> Holy Word can generally be attained at 14th level,




13th-level actually.



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> meaning that when you first get it, normally it kills 4 HD things, but now 7HD things, for a difference of 3HD.




Normally 3 HD/6HD but point taken.



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> That's a fairly significant buff...




I agree. But the alternative



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> I can imagine throwing some 7HD creatures at an ECL 14 party, especially if I threw a LOT of 7HD things at them at once.




Yes but how can you say that the parameters of a spell at 20th-level are okay, but not when cast at 13th-level?



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> Perhaps there's some way to word it that they must be at -least- 10HD below your level, but then use the more relative scaling when 1/2 you HD is greater than 10? The concept is simple enough, but wording it may be tricky....




Well you get a 3HD boost at 13th and 14th. A 2HD boost at 15th and 16th and a 1 HD boost at 17th and 18th. Personally I think I can live with it.



			
				Baranovan said:
			
		

> This issue hit Dicefreaks like a wave some months ago. I think there were a few solutions, but the best one (IMO) was to simply add the death descriptor to the spell's slaying effect, thereby allowing death ward to thwart it.




I'm not sure I like that, it sort of makes the spell obsolete at epic levels (certainly so at immortal levels).


----------



## CRGreathouse

Good news, everyone!  I think I've wheedled (  ) two more epic feats out of the Krust for the Bestiary (part I).


----------



## Baronovan

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Hi guys!




Hey hey! (ala Krusty the Clown)



> I'm not sure I like that, it sort of makes the spell obsolete at epic levels (certainly so at immortal levels).




No moreso than _greater spell immunity_ which, by the way, counts as one of those spells that can be considered "pre-cast"" in a playtest environment. I mean, the spell flat out kills viable targets. Sounds like a death effect to me.


----------



## S'mon

If it were up to me I'd cap the Holy Word death effect at 10 hd/levels, achieved at 20th as per the PHB, after all it was written for non-Epic play.  In fact I'd use that as the rule of thumb whenever you look at PHB spell effects; if they look broken at Epic levels, cap the effect at 20th.


----------



## Anabstercorian

I have a fever.  The fever is giving me crazy ideas.  I must write them down!

Here are a couple of spells I don't know how to write mechanics for while I'm hopped up on anti-fever drugs. @.@

----

*Burn Down The Sky*

_I stood here, upon this green world, where the blue sky stretched from horizon to horizon, and the earthwhales grazed upon the golden fruit of the savannah, and I condemned it to death.
Through my firmament armor, I gazed up, and spread my arms, and began the chant, feeling the blood begin to rise up from my feet to my fingertips from the power I was calling.  Lightning danced over my armor, and shattered the trees near me to charcoal tears.
I closed my eyes and the spell was cast.  The crimson unBolt erupted from me towards the crown of the sky, and in it's wake the air was parted with enough force to turn the sky red, to strip the skin from the earthwhales, to shrivel the golden fruit of the savannah to ashes.
When it struck the barrier between sky and star, it burned, and a fire was upon the world.  Like blood it spread, faster than history.  In it's wake, no air was left, only wisping shreds of unbreathable noble gasses.
I looked upon this gray-green world, trapped dessicated in this moment, never decaying, never again to live, and found it good._

----

*To The End Of The River*

_It had burned down my world, and I chased it from star to star on wings of wrath until I found it, light-years away, on a dark but vibrant planet in the shadow of a gas giant swirling with heart-stoppingly beautiful color.  There it stood, upon the crest of the craggy mountains of that place.  There it stood, with his trophies laid out at it's feet like a funeral shroud.
It stood, shrouded in firmament, gazing at this world through timeless eyes from its foremost face.  The three other faces around it's head searched the horizon for prey, prey that I would soon become, when I rose to my feet from my hiding place two miles away and raised my spear in challenge.
In ten heartbeats, it was before me, godlike in its undying form.  A Mobiatrius, running rampant over the universe, holding time itself hostage - for if it were to die, the paradox would perhaps unravel the world.
I wasn't here to kill him.
It nodded in greeting, even as the blistering energies that scraped the air clean from my world gathered at its forty-nine fingertips, but before it could raise a hand I had closed the distance between us and stopped time for a few heartbeats - enough time for me to draw the circle with seven stars and seven spheres about it on the ground, and prepare to face it.
Its first blow shattered my bracers, which were carved from the eyeteeth of voidserpents hundreds of miles long, in to splinters.  The second broke my arm, which was inscribed with tattoos of protection taken from the Monks of the High Castle hiding in their ice-clad fortress above the gas giant Amayurnus.  The third blow tore my arm from it's socket, but by then it had already lost.  The fourth blow bit deep in to my chest, and the five blow drove me to my knees.
But it was alright, I threw back my head and laughed, and it hesitated, and when it looked up at the sky it wailed in dismay.  The circle I had drawn allowed me to use my greatest power, the one that had drawn me from the history of my planet to its demise, to avenge it, to bring justice to it.  Time is like a river, ending at the ocean.  Like quicksilver salmon we had flashed down it under the power of my enchantment, and as he had battered apart my strongest defense I had watched the star behind him bulge and swell and collapse, thousands of stars winking out, and then hurtle together, and even now, now as he wailed, the pulsing infra-black deathlight of the end of time engulfed us both.
He blew away in it like a dandelion seed, to drift back to the beginning, to begin again, and do what he had done and was doing and would do.  And I?

I wound up here...._


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Anabstercorian mate! 

Hope the fever ain't making you too miserable. 

It can be trickier to apply mechanics to fluff than it can be to apply fluff to mechanics.

I enjoyed reading your two ideas. The first reminded me somewhat of a nuclear explosion in a way, though it probably has more in common with the Rain of Fire epic spell. I did like the use of the tern 'unbolt', very nice touch that.

The second actually outlines a cosmic ability in the Immortals Handbook called Seventh Sense which one of the monsters in the Bestiary Preview has. 

Speaking of which I have just (mere seconds ago in fact) finished printing out the edited version of the first draft of the Bestiary Preview. I'll be reading over it closely the next few days fixing, tweaking and adding where necessary. I'm almost certainly going to be adding one new monster to its contents during that time. Then I'll send it back to the editor for the final run through and by that time I should have the remainder of the art completed *fingers crossed*.


----------



## Anabstercorian

*rubs his goatee with a regal air*

For your productive fervor, and your flattery, I will graciously grant you a one-month reprieve on my no-purchase deadline.

Good luck, Krust!


----------



## Sledge

What you don't give extensions before the deadline has been reached.  Now he can relax knowing that the deadline is lifted.


----------



## Zoatebix

Sledge said:
			
		

> What you don't give extensions before the deadline has been reached.  Now he can relax knowing that the deadline is lifted.



Hmmm...  In that case:
I know for a _fact_ that Anabstercorian was kidding.  Yeah, totally kidding.  No wait, his, uh, little brother - yeah! - got onto his account, read a bunch of this thread for context, and made that post.


----------



## CRGreathouse

As Upper_Krust mentioned, I've sent him the edited copy of the Bestiary (pt. I).  Since I'm sure we'll see it pretty soon (we're really only waiting for the art), I thought I'd go back to one of my favorite pastimes for this thread: seeking random tidbits of information on Apotheosis!

I seem to remember U_K mentioning a Cosmic Ability that made all the deity's damage permamant damage (like the ELH winterwight).  Is that still the case, or has this ability been dropped (or changed in status)?  How powerful is this for PCs? It seems it would be good mostly for NPCs.

Do you intend to release a list of the Cosmic Abilities (or the epic feats, or the other abilities)?  Maybe just a partial list (like of the Divine Abilities) would be appropriate?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey there! 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> As Upper_Krust mentioned, I've sent him the edited copy of the Bestiary (pt. I).  Since I'm sure we'll see it pretty soon (we're really only waiting for the art), I thought I'd go back to one of my favorite pastimes for this thread: seeking random tidbits of information on Apotheosis!
> 
> I seem to remember U_K mentioning a Cosmic Ability that made all the deity's damage permamant damage (like the ELH winterwight).  Is that still the case, or has this ability been dropped (or changed in status)?  How powerful is this for PCs? It seems it would be good mostly for NPCs.




There is a cosmic ability that lets you deal permanent damage within that specific attack - eg. You could gain a Ray attack which dealt permanent damage.

Also all ray attacks and breath weapons (etc.) stack under my rules (up to your Hit Dice anyway), so you could have say, Divine Blast and Abiding Blast and the two would stack. 

There is a trancendental ability that makes all your attacks deal permanent damage.



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> Do you intend to release a list of the Cosmic Abilities (or the epic feats, or the other abilities)?  Maybe just a partial list (like of the Divine Abilities) would be appropriate?




I'll think about it - I have the Divine and Cosmic abilities all decided but only about 2/3rds of the Transcendental and Omnific abilities (I have full lists of them, but there are at least a third of each I am not satisfied with).

I don't really like giving too much away. There are a score or so monster abilities in the Bestiary that are derived from the list(s). 

I will of course reveal more of Apotheosis as the release draws closer - including a preview of portfolios as well as abilities. Its about 50% written and that portion of the work is only slightly bigger than the Bestiary preview (It'll be in around 128 pages). That includes 13 examples, one sample NPC deity of each divine status, from Disciple - High Lord. If I remember right, each sample is from a different pantheon, and all the alignments are covered...just to give a good spread.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> There is a cosmic ability that lets you deal permanent damage within that specific attack - eg. You could gain a Ray attack which dealt permanent damage.
> 
> Also all ray attacks and breath weapons (etc.) stack under my rules (up to your Hit Dice anyway), so you could have say, Divine Blast and Abiding Blast and the two would stack.




From the last thread:


			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Sorry about the delay, I tried posting the list earlier but the boards were just incredibly slow.
> 
> Here is the list of the first 32 (of 128) Divine Abilities
> 
> Abatement
> Abiding [Effect]
> Abnormal[...]
> Divine Architect
> Divine Champion
> Divine Immensity[...]




I see Abiding Blast, but no Divine Blast -- it's not under either Divine Blast or Divine [Effect].

1. Is Abiding [Effect] related to this cosmic ability, or has it been promoted to a cosmic ability?
2. What's Divine Blast?
3. What's the name of the trancendental ability?


----------



## Baronovan

Pardon me, U_K, but how can an ability that deals "permanent" damage possibly be balanced against other aspects of a creature's design? Is this more akin to vile damage, in that it can cured under very specific circumstances? Or is it more like the Shape of Fire power? If it's the latter, I don't know if I'd ever want to fight one unless I felt it had less than a 10% chance to hit my character(s), let alone ever be satisified with whatever material rewards such a fight might grant... unless I get my HP back afterwards.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Baronovan said:
			
		

> Pardon me, U_K, but how can an ability that deals "permanent" damage possibly be balanced against other aspects of a creature's design? Is this more akin to vile damage, in that it can cured under very specific circumstances? Or is it more like the Shape of Fire power? If it's the latter, I don't know if I'd ever want to fight one unless I felt it had less than a 10% chance to hit my character(s), let alone ever be satisified with whatever material rewards such a fight might grant... unless I get my HP back afterwards.




He's said it's like shape of fire (or at least lavawight, which is the same as I recall).


----------



## Anabstercorian

Ooh, shapes of fire and lavawights are horrible, horrible creatures.  There must be SOME way to heal that damage...


----------



## Upper_Krust

CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> From the last thread:
> 
> I see Abiding Blast, but no Divine Blast -- it's not under either Divine Blast or Divine [Effect].
> 
> 1. Is Abiding [Effect] related to this cosmic ability, or has it been promoted to a cosmic ability?




Tricky answer. As you know I favour using different dice size for different effects. So energy is d6, Aligned power is d8, bane d12 etc.

Well Abiding is technically 1/2 a point instead of a dice...as a divine ability...or d4 as a cosmic ability. So I am not sure which is best.



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> 2. What's Divine Blast?




Similar sort of thing to Abiding Effect above. Technically divine energy should be d3s, but I may have made it d12s and stuck it in the cosmic abilities.



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> 3. What's the name of the trancendental ability?




I was calling it Oblivion, but I'll probably change that.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Thanks for the complete answers.  I had no idea I was asking so many questions all at once.



			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> I was calling it Oblivion, but I'll probably change that.




I like that name!


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Baranovan mate! 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Pardon me, U_K, but how can an ability that deals "permanent" damage possibly be balanced against other aspects of a creature's design? Is this more akin to vile damage, in that it can cured under very specific circumstances? Or is it more like the Shape of Fire power? If it's the latter, I don't know if I'd ever want to fight one unless I felt it had less than a 10% chance to hit my character(s), let alone ever be satisified with whatever material rewards such a fight might grant... unless I get my HP back afterwards.




Without risk there is no reward. I'd just like to think I am putting the fear back into epic play where resurrection is so common place that death is but an inconvenience. I should ask S'mon to write a simony column on death at high level - he has rewritten the various 'resurrection' spells for his campaign for a much more lethal campaign. Greater the risks, greater the reward.

That said I have a DMs optional idea for the possible recovery of such damage in the Bestiary.


----------



## Anabstercorian

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> I'd just like to think I am putting the fear back into epic play where resurrection is so common place that death is but an inconvenience.





Consider my trousers pre-soiled.


----------



## Sledge

Speaking of improved metamagic capacity/metamagic freedom.


			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> By the way, I don't like the idea of this stacking with Improved Metamagic, just to let you know. Also, technically it would replace multispell as well. Instead of multispell you just stack two quickened spells. etc.
> Any comments?



How does one stack two quickened spells?
Also it just occurred to me that I'm not sure.  But you do intend for these free metamagics to be prepared by wizards right?


----------



## Baronovan

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Without risk there is no reward.




"Risk"... what CRs are these things supposed to be for the risk to be so severe? (permanent hit point loss far outweighs trinkets and XP, IMO)



> That said I have a DMs optional idea for the possible recovery of such damage in the Bestiary.




Excellent. Looking forward to the variant ideas.


----------



## Baronovan

Sledge said:
			
		

> How does one stack two quickened spells?




I imagine (and this is just me) that it means you could "double quicken" a spell, making it a viable option even after one has expended the regular quicken option, perhaps with a +8 spell level bump instead of merely a +4.


----------



## Cheiromancer

CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> Here are all of the Immortal's Handbook threads I was able to find, with links:
> 
> By Date
> 01. The Worship Points System (2002-01-18)
> 02. Immortals Handbook (aka The Worship Points System) (2002-02-22)
> 03. The Immortal`s Handbook (2002-06-04)
> 04. Upper Krust, where are you? [Immortal's Handbook] (2002-07-24)
> 05. Immortal's Handbook continuation thread (2003-01-23)
> 06. Immortal's Handbook continuation thread continuation (2003-03-14)
> 07. Revised Challenge Ratings/Encounter Levels (pdf) (2003-03-30)
> 08. Revised CRs/ECLs continuation thread (2003-05-04)
> 09. immortals handbook (2003-06-30)
> 10. Revised CRs/ECLs - Thread #3 (2003-08-30)
> 11. v4: Challenge Ratings pdf (3.5 compatible) (2003-10-15)
> 12. The Immortals Handbook (2004-01-26)
> 13. Immortal's Handbook CR/EL Rules: Don't Count Ability Scores (Proof Positive Inside!) (2004-02-17)
> 14. The (new) Immortals Handbook Thread (2005-01-25)
> 
> 
> By Forum Rank (# of posts) (Yes, we have all of the top 7!)
> 1. The Immortals Handbook (1440 replies)
> 2. Upper Krust, where are you? [Immortal's Handbook] (794 replies)
> 3. v4: Challenge Ratings pdf (3.5 compatible) (740 replies)
> 4. immortals handbook (673 replies)
> 5. Revised Challenge Ratings/Encounter Levels (pdf) (521 replies)
> 6. Immortal's Handbook continuation thread (475 replies)
> 7. Revised CRs/ECLs continuation thread (430 replies)
> 14. The Worship Points System (232 replies)
> 17. Immortals Handbook (aka The Worship Points System) (200 replies)
> 28. Revised CRs/ECLs - Thread #3 (135 replies)
> 38. Immortal's Handbook continuation thread continuation (109 replies)
> 66. The Immortal`s Handbook (73 replies)
> 68. Immortal's Handbook CR/EL Rules: Don't Count Ability Scores (Proof Positive Inside!) (71 replies)
> ~500. The (new) Immortals Handbook Thread (~20 replies)
> 
> 
> By Thread Starter
> Anubis
> Upper Krust, where are you? [Immortal's Handbook]
> Immortal's Handbook CR/EL Rules: Don't Count Ability Scores (Proof Positive Inside!)
> 
> Darkness
> Revised CRs/ECLs - Thread #3
> 
> Dinkeldog
> Immortal's Handbook continuation thread
> Revised CRs/ECLs continuation thread
> 
> Eldorian
> Immortal's Handbook continuation thread continuation
> 
> kkoie
> immortals handbook
> 
> Melkor, Lord Of ALL!
> The Immortal`s Handbook
> 
> Upper_Krust
> The Worship Points System
> Immortals Handbook (aka The Worship Points System)
> Revised Challenge Ratings/Encounter Levels (pdf)
> v4: Challenge Ratings pdf (3.5 compatible)
> The Immortals Handbook
> The (new) Immortals Handbook Thread




There is also Level Independent XP Awards by myself (with lots of help from Anubis and Wulf Ratbane).


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Anabstercorian mate! 



			
				Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> Consider my trousers pre-soiled.




I think there are other more awesome powers in the Bestiary. I know CRGreathouse mentioned he was frightened of some of them...and he was only editing the book.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey there! 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> "Risk"... what CRs are these things supposed to be for the risk to be so severe? (permanent hit point loss far outweighs trinkets and XP, IMO).




He he - the fear has already set in. 

Obviously thats included in the CR - this is me remember. 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> I imagine (and this is just me) that it means you could "double quicken" a spell, making it a viable option even after one has expended the regular quicken option, perhaps with a +8 spell level bump instead of merely a +4.




Well if you have Automatic Metamagic Capacity x8 and Metamagic Freedom you can use +4 and +4 for two seperate quickened spells.

Technically you could also cast a standard quickened spell using higher spell slots, so you could technically cast three quickened spells (one of which would be no higher than a 5th-level spell using a 9th-level spell slot) and one regular spell. Of course you would need to be at least 32nd-level (I think) to have that many feats.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Technically you could also cast a standard quickened spell using higher spell slots, so you could technically cast three quickened spells (one of which would be no higher than a 5th-level spell using a 9th-level spell slot) and one regular spell. Of course you would need to be at least 32nd-level (I think) to have that many feats.




What Baronovan's getting at is that, under the current rules excluding Multispell, it's not possible to cast more than two spells during your round.  Further, you're talking about applying a metamagic feat twice, which (a) isn't possible in the current incarnation of the rules, lacking Metamagic Freedom, and (b) doesn't make sense for this particular feat, since it would have no effect (like Quickening _feather fall_).

Baronovan wants you to outline what you mean by this, assuming that you have plenty of high-level splots open.


----------



## Baronovan

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Hey there!
> 
> 
> 
> He he - the fear has already set in.
> 
> Obviously thats included in the CR - this is me remember.




Well, the rewards had better compensate for losing those hit points against every creature fought from that point on...


----------



## Sledge

Well if I have this straight normal is one spell plus one quickened(+4).
With metamagic freedom it is one normal, one quickened(+4), one double quickened(+8).
Eventually one normal, one quickened(+4), one double quickened(+8), one triple quickened(+12), etc etc
Right?  Looks good because the caster is trading power for speed.


----------



## CRGreathouse

By Date
01. The Worship Points System (2002-01-18)
02. Immortals Handbook (aka The Worship Points System) (2002-02-22)
03. The Immortal`s Handbook (2002-06-04)
04. Upper Krust, where are you? [Immortal's Handbook] (2002-07-24)
05. Immortal's Handbook continuation thread (2003-01-23)
06. Immortal's Handbook continuation thread continuation (2003-03-14)
07. Revised Challenge Ratings/Encounter Levels (pdf) (2003-03-30)
08. Revised Challenge Ratings/Encounter Levels pdf (Version 3) (2003-04-07)
09. Revised CRs/ECLs continuation thread (2003-05-04)
10. immortals handbook (2003-06-30)
11. Revised CRs/ECLs - Thread #3 (2003-08-30)
12. v4: Challenge Ratings pdf (3.5 compatible) (2003-10-15)
13. The Immortals Handbook (2004-01-26)
14. Immortal's Handbook CR/EL Rules: Don't Count Ability Scores (Proof Positive Inside!) (2004-02-17)
15. The (new) Immortals Handbook Thread (2005-01-25)

By Forum Rank (# of posts) (Yes, we have all of the top 7!)
1. The Immortals Handbook (1440 replies)
2. Upper Krust, where are you? [Immortal's Handbook] (794 replies)
3. v4: Challenge Ratings pdf (3.5 compatible) (740 replies)
4. immortals handbook (673 replies)
5. Revised Challenge Ratings/Encounter Levels (pdf) (521 replies)
6. Immortal's Handbook continuation thread (475 replies)
7. Revised CRs/ECLs continuation thread (430 replies)
10. The (new) Immortals Handbook Thread (~320 replies)
16. The Worship Points System (232 replies)
19. Immortals Handbook (aka The Worship Points System) (200 replies)
32. Revised CRs/ECLs - Thread #3 (135 replies)
43. Immortal's Handbook continuation thread continuation (109 replies)
72. The Immortal`s Handbook (73 replies)
75. Immortal's Handbook CR/EL Rules: Don't Count Ability Scores (Proof Positive Inside!) (71 replies)
348. Revised Challenge Ratings/Encounter Levels pdf (Version 3) (28 replies)

By Thread Starter
Anubis
Upper Krust, where are you? [Immortal's Handbook]
Immortal's Handbook CR/EL Rules: Don't Count Ability Scores (Proof Positive Inside!)

Darkness
Revised CRs/ECLs - Thread #3

Dinkeldog
Immortal's Handbook continuation thread
Revised CRs/ECLs continuation thread

Eldorian
Immortal's Handbook continuation thread continuation

kkoie
immortals handbook

Melkor, Lord Of ALL!
The Immortal`s Handbook

Upper_Krust
The Worship Points System
Immortals Handbook (aka The Worship Points System)
Revised Challenge Ratings/Encounter Levels (pdf)
Revised Challenge Ratings/Encounter Levels pdf (Version 3)
v4: Challenge Ratings pdf (3.5 compatible)
The Immortals Handbook
The (new) Immortals Handbook Thread

Related Threads
Anubis' Saiyans and Tyranids (2002-09-01)
Anubis' Expanded ECL rules! (2002-09-05)
Anubis' "Rules: Saiyans" by Anubis (2002-09-16)
Anubis' "The Big Big Book of Feats" by Anubis (2002-09-16)
Jarval's How much effect on ECL should Fast Healing have? (2002-10-02)
Cheiromancer's Epic Spellcasting (2003-11-27)
Cheiromancer's Level Independent XP Awards (2004-04-28)

**************

Conversions
Converting from various systems into the 3E D&D system of the Immortals Handbook
SDAs into Divine Abilities and Cosmic Abilities
Gods & Monsters from 1E
Gods from OD&D Immortals and Primal Order

Previews and Free Stuff
Monsters and other material, either previewed from the Bestiary or just miscellaneous material showing Upper_Krust's style.
Crown Naga (CR 25)
Epic Tarrasque (CR 44)
Anakim (Silent One) (CR 45)
Amilictli (All-Relentless Thunder) (CR 85)
Godzilla (CR 120)
Talos (CR 128)
King Ghidorah (CR 133)
Gibborim (Mighty One)
5 epic feats

Revised CR/EL System
Draft #1 (2003-03-30)
Draft #3 (2003-04-07)
Draft #4 (2003-10-15)


----------



## S'mon

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Without risk there is no reward. I'd just like to think I am putting the fear back into epic play where resurrection is so common place that death is but an inconvenience. I should ask S'mon to write a simony column on death at high level - he has rewritten the various 'resurrection' spells for his campaign for a much more lethal campaign. Greater the risks, greater the reward.




Certainly I feel that fear is an important part of the game.  Otherwise you might as well play Diablo.  I've now taken to using Fate Points to keep PCs alive through the low levels, so arguably I've gone a bit soft in my old age, but certainly I feel that deity-level play needs constraints on the PCs, and fear is an important one.  In mythology, the gods are often afraid - in fact you could argue that fear is the dominant emotion in many pantheons, certainly the Norse and arguably the Greek.  When you have so much to lose, fear of death is natural.  A major arc has just kicked off in my campaign world BTW, as the Sword Rulers (Arioch Xiombarg & Mabelode) turn their attention to Thrin's homeworld Ea... I'm looking forward to lots of high-level fun... and fear.    

In my campaign, Thrin "the Brave" often rightfully fears the foe, whether that's some mortal with a vorpal battleaxe or automatic grenade launcher, or a rival deity.  The PC deities who _didn't_ fear when they should have, like Mirv "I'll lightning bolt Hel again" Sheelon, are all dead...


----------



## S'mon

Baronovan said:
			
		

> "Risk"... what CRs are these things supposed to be for the risk to be so severe? (permanent hit point loss far outweighs trinkets and XP, IMO)




IMC there are plenty of 'monsters' who nobody in their right mind would voluntarily _seek out_ to battle against.  I can just imagine it - "Yeah let's go to Mt Kos, there's a wizard there called Doomstar and I hear he has loads of kewl loot..."    

However, sometimes you don't get a choice - the monsters seek _you_ out.  Then you can fight, or you can run and hide.  Sometimes you are impelled to fight, for a greater cause, even knowing the odds.  Deity level play IMC is not all fun and hijinks and CR-balanced encounters!  It's a big, tough multiverse out there, and just because you can eat pantheons for breakfast doesn't mean there isn't something that can (and will) eat you for breakfast, too.  That's the feel Craig seems to be going for - I think it's tres cool.    

BTW Craig if you think any of my comments on these threads are helpful, please feel free to repost them on your website.


----------



## S'mon

Baronovan said:
			
		

> Well, the rewards had better compensate for losing those hit points against every creature fought from that point on...




Aw, poor kitty.   

Edit:  Craig still complains about the time Thrin had to sacrifice a permanent point of WIS just to ask Lady Sarasathsa (Lord of Paradox) a question...


----------



## Baronovan

Well, this cat thinks it's tres crappy to lose HP permanently, no matter what the paltry "gains" or contrived circumstances. The game is like an algebraic equation, and such a power seems way out of line without at least _some way_ of countering it or repairing it. I'm just glad Krust is putting in a variant that allows sane people to participate, as even vile damage ala _BoVD_ can be healed. Beyond that, I'm sorry for Thrin that the 2nd Ed mentality of permanent damage to anything still exists outside of its framework, unless of course that event occurred in 2nd Ed. I'm sure he would have been more upset had it been a permanent point of Con he had lost.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey S'mon! 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Certainly I feel that fear is an important part of the game.  Otherwise you might as well play Diablo.




Exactly. Its not just the same fights with higher numbers, at epic and immortal levels eventually anything is possible. So the potential is there to manipulate D&D mechanics in ways that perhaps wouldn't be 'fair' at non-epic levels.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> I've now taken to using Fate Points to keep PCs alive through the low levels, so arguably I've gone a bit soft in my old age, but certainly I feel that deity-level play needs constraints on the PCs, and fear is an important one.  In mythology, the gods are often afraid - in fact you could argue that fear is the dominant emotion in many pantheons, certainly the Norse and arguably the Greek.  When you have so much to lose, fear of death is natural.




Which is another reason why its always better to roleplay a deity from lower levels up through to divinity, because it means you have invested more time in the character and thus have much more to lose than someone who has just rolled up the deity the day before.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> A major arc has just kicked off in my campaign world BTW, as the Sword Rulers (Arioch Xiombarg & Mabelode) turn their attention to Thrin's homeworld Ea... I'm looking forward to lots of high-level fun... and fear.




We will win...whatever the cost.   



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> In my campaign, Thrin "the Brave" often rightfully fears the foe, whether that's some mortal with a vorpal battleaxe or automatic grenade launcher, or a rival deity.




Thats not fear, its caution backed by intellect.   

The only time Thrin has ever lost was when he didn't know the enemy, thus making the cardinal sin of ignoring Sun Tzus advice. I don't like losing. Ever.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> The PC deities who _didn't_ fear when they should have, like Mirv "I'll lightning bolt Hel again" Sheelon, are all dead...




Well its not like you didn't give him a chance.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> IMC there are plenty of 'monsters' who nobody in their right mind would voluntarily _seek out_ to battle against. I can just imagine it - "Yeah let's go to Mt Kos, there's a wizard there called Doomstar and I hear he has loads of kewl loot..."




This reminds me of a film I watched yesterday...Superman 2. The three villains, all with the same powers as Superman, beat him up and temporarily wedged him between a bus and a building. The people on the streets of New York, thought Superman dead, and collectively decided "Lets get them!". Fortunately the movie was a 'U' certificate and the villains just used their super breath to blow them down the street.

I was just wondering do gamers see epic play as a sort of 'U' certificate movie, wherein thanks to resurrection (and similar 'get out of jail' options) they can't seriously be hurt?



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> However, sometimes you don't get a choice - the monsters seek _you_ out. Then you can fight, or you can run and hide. Sometimes you are impelled to fight, for a greater cause, even knowing the odds. Deity level play IMC is not all fun and hijinks and CR-balanced encounters! It's a big, tough multiverse out there, and just because you can eat pantheons for breakfast doesn't mean there isn't something that can (and will) eat you for breakfast, too. That's the feel Craig seems to be going for - I think it's tres cool.




You taught me well Obi-wan.

...by the way Revenge of the Sith is good, but not great IMO. 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> BTW Craig if you think any of my comments on these threads are helpful, please feel free to repost them on your website.




Its all a bit haphazard, I'll probably write something on it when I get the chance.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Aw, poor kitty.




It appears some of these players see epic gaming as some sort of security blanket...should be fun to pull back the covers on them. 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Edit: Craig still complains about the time Thrin had to sacrifice a permanent point of WIS just to ask Lady Sarasathsa (Lord of Paradox) a question...




I can remember complaining about the Raistlin debacle; the Drakhen (Planetar) incident and the Oleg Gadinsky metagaming. But not the Sarasathsa question. Not saying I didn't complain...just that I don't remember doing so.


----------



## S'mon

Baronovan said:
			
		

> Well, this cat thinks it's tres crappy to lose HP permanently, no matter what the paltry "gains" or contrived circumstances. The game is like an algebraic equation, and such a power seems way out of line without at least _some way_ of countering it or repairing it. I'm just glad Krust is putting in a variant that allows sane people to participate, as even vile damage ala _BoVD_ can be healed. Beyond that, I'm sorry for Thrin that the 2nd Ed mentality of permanent damage to anything still exists outside of its framework, unless of course that event occurred in 2nd Ed. I'm sure he would have been more upset had it been a permanent point of Con he had lost.




It was 1e/2e, and his choice.  Oh, and screw algebraic equations.

Edit: The obvious counter is not to get hit.  Don't fight this guy in melee, at least not outside a dead magic zone.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Baranovan mate! 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Well, this cat thinks it's tres crappy to lose HP permanently, no matter what the paltry "gains" or contrived circumstances.




Heroism is about risk. If you risk nothing then where is the heroism? As I mentioned before, death can be nothing more than an inconvenience at epic levels - only a Total Party Kill is going to have the gravitas of finality.

So if death is "but a dream", then epic players have to risk things other than their lives. This can be a number of things: equipment/wealth, lands, reputation, worshippers (for immortals)



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> The game is like an algebraic equation,




If high level means nothing more than bigger numbers then it becomes next to pointless.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> and such a power seems way out of line without at least _some way_ of countering it or repairing it.




Well you could always buy an Amulet of Health.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> I'm just glad Krust is putting in a variant that allows sane people to participate,




Smell the fear. 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> as even vile damage ala _BoVD_ can be healed.




Vile damage is simply an evil taint though, hardly as powerful as the annihilating embrace of emptiness.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Beyond that, I'm sorry for Thrin that the 2nd Ed mentality of permanent damage to anything still exists outside of its framework, unless of course that event occurred in 2nd Ed. I'm sure he would have been more upset had it been a permanent point of Con he had lost.




I was given the choice - I knew the risks.


----------



## historian

Hey guys.



> Exactly. Its not just the same fights with higher numbers, at epic and immortal levels eventually anything is possible. So the potential is there to manipulate D&D mechanics in ways that perhaps wouldn't be 'fair' at non-epic levels.




Agreed, and this is why true "Immortal" gaming is different from just extrapolating epic levels upwards w/o changing settings, consequences and tactics.  It would be pretty boring if all the CR 145 planar warlord did was power attack for a higher value.



> You taught me well Obi-wan.
> 
> ...by the way Revenge of the Sith is good, but not great IMO.




 

The movie seemed a bit rushed to me, but all in all I thought it was strong except for some over-acting.  By the way U_K, what CR would you put on some of the major characters (Yoda, Sidious, Anakin, Mace, Obi-Wan)?


----------



## Upper_Krust

historian said:
			
		

> Hey guys.




Howdy! 



			
				historian said:
			
		

> The movie seemed a bit rushed to me, but all in all I thought it was strong except for some over-acting.




For me parts of the movie lacked a certain gravitas (I won't post any spoilers for those who haven't seen it yet), for instance the space battle at the start is not really a battle at all, its just a backdrop. I did like the character of General Grievous. Palpatine pretty much steals the show, however I expected he'd be more powerful than was shown. It was interesting hearing about Darth Plagueus (sp?). The conclusion to 'THE duel' didn't make a whole lot of sense. 

Of the three prequel movies I think Attack of the Clones left me the most satisfied, while slow to start the latter half of that movie was brilliant.



			
				historian said:
			
		

> By the way U_K, what CR would you put on some of the major characters (Yoda, Sidious, Anakin, Mace, Obi-Wan)?




I suspect Star Wars D20 does a much better job of things than I could proffer on a whim. I doubt any were epic, though I suppose force users are always going to have the edge depending on how strong they are with the force...it would be interesting to know how they handle the force in D20 - I have fond memories of WEGs D6 based Star Wars RPG.


----------



## Baronovan

S'mon said:
			
		

> It was 1e/2e, and his choice. Oh, and screw algebraic equations.
> 
> Edit: The obvious counter is not to get hit. Don't fight this guy in melee, at least not outside a dead magic zone.




Nice retort.

If the creature's strength is in dealing permanent damage to you, how long before it finds a way to circumvent whatever method is being used to avoid melee? Not looking like a solid argument here...


----------



## Baronovan

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> As I mentioned before, death can be nothing more than an inconvenience at epic levels - only a Total Party Kill is going to have the gravitas of finality.




That aside, how about not being able to stand up any more encounters after one fight with one of these "perma-damage" whathaveyous? Has this even crossed your mind?



> If high level means nothing more than bigger numbers then it becomes next to pointless.




If high levels would then otherwise imply that my numbers start to go back down, where's the point in that? I think you're painting yourself into a corner.



> Well you could always buy an Amulet of Health.




Like the one a character would undoubtedly already have at high-epic levels?



> Smell the fear.




Hmm.. smells like paint to me.



> Vile damage is simply an evil taint though, hardly as powerful as the annihilating embrace of emptiness.




Vile damage can be played up to hell and back, made flavorful, and even cured if the circumstances are right. What you just described is nothing more than a string of adjectives. I don't see a "step up" or a "bigger challenge", I see a broken mechanic.



> I was given the choice - I knew the risks.




I guess I'll just have to choose to ignore this creature, whatever it ends up being. Not including such a player-shafting ability in my game is a risk I'm willing to take as a DM. Why not just have a creature who kills permanently? As in, no resurrections will abate it? Or maybe have a creature whose victims always lose a point of Con after resurrection? Anything is better than forcing those people who get into melee with it to retire if they manage to survive because with non-recoverable HP loss, that's essentially what I'm seeing here.


----------



## historian

Hey U_K!   



> Of the three prequel movies I think Attack of the Clones left me the most satisfied, while slow to start the latter half of that movie was brilliant.




I concur but I believe that we are in the minority.  



> It was interesting hearing about Darth Plagueus (sp?).




I don't have the novelization handy but my recollection is that it is "Plagueis."  That means it's probably spelled otherwise.  



> I suspect Star Wars D20 does a much better job of things than I could proffer on a whim.




The d20 effort isn't bad, but IMO, too many of their character write-ups are clustered around the same level of power.  For instance, only one or two levels separate Vader and Sidious (seems like Vader is 18th or 19th and Sidious is 20th).  There is also the issue of what to do with characters above 20th level, although I think the unofficial answer is to continue extrapolating class benefits beyond 20th.  However, I think that there is a greater disparity in power between classes than standard d20 fare (the Jedi and Sith classes, for example, benefit from several abilities -- such as enhanced base lightsaber damage -- that other classes don't get), so the "clustering" might not be as tight as it would seem.

Anyway, I prefer to think of Yoda and Sidious as having distinct, but not insurmountable advantages over say Obi-Wan and Darth Vader (something like CR 30 vs. CR 20).



> I have fond memories of WEGs D6 based Star Wars RPG.




It really did a nice job of capturing the feel of the Original Trilogy I thought.  I have several of the D6 books.  Incidentally, I've found that the D6 system readily (almost obviously) converts to the old Marvel system.


----------



## Dyson

hey..........nothing to say



because this is all trash.


----------



## Dyson

S'mon said:
			
		

> It was 1e/2e, and his choice. Oh, and screw algebraic equations.
> 
> Edit: The obvious counter is not to get hit. Don't fight this guy in melee, at least not outside a dead magic zone.




Screw algebraic equations?


Aren't you writing helping in designing? Desiging, using d20 system which is based off of formula?
Do you even appreciate the game you play anymore? 


_"Yay, let's go to the moon! But screw the navigational device on that ship."_


----------



## Dyson

> Vile damage is simply an evil taint though, hardly as powerful as the annihilating embrace of emptiness





Is that fact?

Is that how it's described in BoVD, or is that your own interrpretation of how pathetic you think it is?


----------



## S'mon

Dyson said:
			
		

> Aren't you writing helping in designing?




Nope.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Dyson said:
			
		

> Is that fact?
> 
> Is that how it's described in BoVD, or is that your own interrpretation of how pathetic you think it is?




I think that by any reasonable opinion, permanent damage is more powerful than vile damage -- vile damage is healed without too much trouble, while permanent damage is either actually permanent or *very* hard to heal.

In comparison, I think "simply an evil taint" is quite apt.


----------



## Anabstercorian

Yeah, don't be so dismissive about it, Dyson.


----------



## Dinkeldog

Dyson, if you're not interested, then don't participate.  Threadcrapping is not appreciated.


----------



## Dyson

_phfffft



*plop!


"Ahhh....."_


----------



## Baronovan

CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> vile damage is healed without too much trouble, while permanent damage is either actually permanent or *very* hard to heal.




The thing about vile damage is that it's as good as permanent damage inside of the encounter in which it's dealt. Afterwards, it takes a little more effort to heal, but nothing too tough. Permanent damage affects all fights from here on out, limiting your resources unfairly based on the idea that "you knew the risks", which doesn't placate me at all. I don't know how anyone else feels.

I think some important questions are: how much permanent damage do these things deal? what is the modifier used for the attack? what is their rough CR? If these things balance out a minimal (I'm talking a few d3s here) amount of such damage, it might not be completely over the top, but I'm betting on it being ludicrous.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Baronovan said:
			
		

> I think some important questions are: how much permanent damage do these things deal? what is the modifier used for the attack? what is their rough CR? If these things balance out a minimal (I'm talking a few d3s here) amount of such damage, it might not be completely over the top, but I'm betting on it being ludicrous.




I'm not really in a position to argue for or against this, but I will say that it seemed fairly balanced -- it's not costed like vile damage would be.


----------



## Anabstercorian

Baronovan said:
			
		

> The thing about vile damage is that it's as good as permanent damage inside of the encounter in which it's dealt. Afterwards, it takes a little more effort to heal, but nothing too tough. Permanent damage affects all fights from here on out, limiting your resources unfairly based on the idea that "you knew the risks", which doesn't placate me at all. I don't know how anyone else feels.
> 
> I think some important questions are: how much permanent damage do these things deal? what is the modifier used for the attack? what is their rough CR? If these things balance out a minimal (I'm talking a few d3s here) amount of such damage, it might not be completely over the top, but I'm betting on it being ludicrous.




I would be disappointed if there weren't creatures at the high end of the scale that did enough permanent, unhealable damage in a single blow to kill the typical 20th level barbarian ten times over.

The Multiverse doesn't have to be nice.  If you find the concept of permanent damage appalling, strike it from your game and include none of the options based around it.  But ultra-high-level gaming gets weird and horrible without apology - your ability to run like hell is almost unlimited, after all.


----------



## S'mon

Baronovan said:
			
		

> Nice retort.




Sorry, came out ruder than I intended.  Really though, players have no business concerning themselves with wealth-by-level and all that.  And for the DM, unless the PC is so badly mauled he's now weaker than a 25PB Iconic of equivalent level, the sacred 'balance' will be maintained.  If he actually is weaker, give him a negative ECL adjustment.  And of course PCs can become weaker, that's fundamental to the Worship Points System.  There are plenty of permanently weakening effects in lower level games too - level-draining undead, death & raising/resureection, etc.


----------



## S'mon

Baronovan said:
			
		

> If the creature's strength is in dealing permanent damage to you, how long before it finds a way to circumvent whatever method is being used to avoid melee? Not looking like a solid argument here...




Well then, you presumably scream and die in horrible agony?  That's what happens to PCs IMC who get overconfident, whether they're 1st level or 100th.


----------



## S'mon

Baronovan said:
			
		

> I guess I'll just have to choose to ignore this creature, whatever it ends up being. Not including such a player-shafting ability in my game is a risk I'm willing to take as a DM.




Um... no-one ever said you were obliged to include this creature in your game?!  The last thing I would do is stick it in some random dungeon crawl.  When deity PCs IMC get mangled by some horrible beastie/deity it's because they screwed up badly, not because I rolled "96-97:Hel" on the random deity encounter table...


----------



## Plane Sailing

Dyson said:
			
		

> _phfffft
> 
> 
> 
> *plop!
> 
> 
> "Ahhh....."_




Do you think that is clever? We don't. Banned for three days.

Regards,


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Baranovan mate! 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> That aside, how about not being able to stand up any more encounters after one fight with one of these "perma-damage" whathaveyous? Has this even crossed your mind?




Of course.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> If high levels would then otherwise imply that my numbers start to go back down, where's the point in that? I think you're painting yourself into a corner.




Not at all, Challenge Ratings remain consistent throughout. Simply that the higher in challenge rating you go the more the impossible becomes possible.

Which means its not a case of the same mechanics over and over again with higher numbers, but also fresh perspectives and new possibilities.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Like the one a character would undoubtedly already have at high-epic levels?




...so...get a better one. Increase your constitution with Great Constitution. Increase your hit points with Improved Toughness. Dominate someone (preferably a barbarian with hundreds of hit points), imbue with spell ability (shield other) then use a wish and permanency - hey presto, an extra few hundred hit points. 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Hmm.. smells like paint to me.




Tastes like chicken more like. 

As Valeria would say, "Do you want to live forever."



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Vile damage can be played up to hell and back, made flavorful, and even cured if the circumstances are right. What you just described is nothing more than a string of adjectives.




Vile damage is simply vile damage, not permanent damage. It means you have to cast a consecrate or hallow spell before you can heal up. Or it means you have to wait until the end of the battle to heal. Or you can quickened planeshift (or teleport) to holy ground then heal and then planeshift/teleport back again (assuming you are not fighting on holy ground already or have no consecrate/hallow spells).

Permanent damage is permanent damage, not vile damage. You can't heal it because there is nothing left 'to' heal.

Two different things.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> I don't see a "step up" or a "bigger challenge", I see a broken mechanic.




Firstly, its not broken at all, you're simply scared of it...which was indirectly the point in the first place.

Secondly they already have epic monsters (in the ELH) that deal permanent damage and these are CR 23 and 26 respectively. You could even be fighting them at non-epic levels according to WotC.

Thirdly I give the option in the text itself on how to reverse this effect. Its incredulous that you're still busting my chops over it! 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> I guess I'll just have to choose to ignore this creature, whatever it ends up being. Not including such a player-shafting ability in my game is a risk I'm willing to take as a DM. Why not just have a creature who kills permanently?




How in the Nine Hells is permanent death okay by you, but permanent damage isn't!?

...oh, and who says I don't have creatures that kill permanently. 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> As in, no resurrections will abate it? Or maybe have a creature whose victims always lose a point of Con after resurrection?




A 'point' of constitution. At epic levels. Hardly a cause for concern.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Anything is better than forcing those people who get into melee with it to retire if they manage to survive because with non-recoverable HP loss, that's essentially what I'm seeing here.




No one has forced anyone into melee with anything.

But you have just already given me carte blanche to retire characters by making them non-resurrectable - so whats the difference here?


----------



## Upper_Krust

historian said:
			
		

> Hey U_K!




Hey historian mate! 



			
				historian said:
			
		

> I concur but I believe that we are in the minority.




Probably. But I think once the furore surrounding the latest film is over, things may be different. 



			
				historian said:
			
		

> I don't have the novelization handy but my recollection is that it is "Plagueis."  That means it's probably spelled otherwise.




Yes I noticed it spelt that way by someone over at aintitcool.



			
				historian said:
			
		

> The d20 effort isn't bad, but IMO, too many of their character write-ups are clustered around the same level of power.  For instance, only one or two levels separate Vader and Sidious (seems like Vader is 18th or 19th and Sidious is 20th).  There is also the issue of what to do with characters above 20th level, although I think the unofficial answer is to continue extrapolating class benefits beyond 20th.  However, I think that there is a greater disparity in power between classes than standard d20 fare (the Jedi and Sith classes, for example, benefit from several abilities -- such as enhanced base lightsaber damage -- that other classes don't get), so the "clustering" might not be as tight as it would seem.
> 
> Anyway, I prefer to think of Yoda and Sidious as having distinct, but not insurmountable advantages over say Obi-Wan and Darth Vader (something like CR 30 vs. CR 20).




Well from the movie, we can see that there wasn't that much difference between the top Jedi/Sith. So the main characters must have all been about 16-20th level.



			
				historian said:
			
		

> It really did a nice job of capturing the feel of the Original Trilogy I thought.  I have several of the D6 books.




It was a great system I thought, quick and easy. Also starting characters were fairly powerful (unlike D&D).



			
				historian said:
			
		

> Incidentally, I've found that the D6 system readily (almost obviously) converts to the old Marvel system.




How exactly?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey there Dyson! 

Perhaps when the imprisonment spell wears off you will see this reply.



			
				Dyson said:
			
		

> Is that fact? Is that how it's described in BoVD,




Well its described as a violation of a characters body or soul that only in a holy place can healing magic repair the damage. Or to put it simply and succinctly, an evil taint. 



			
				Dyson said:
			
		

> or is that your own interrpretation of how pathetic you think it is?




I don't think its pathetic, but clearly its less powerful.

Just like a Dragonne is less powerful than a Tarrasque, a Tarrasque is less powerful than a Xixecal, etc. Akin to the relationship between normal, vile and permanent damage.

One does not make the other redundant, they are simply different.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Baranovan matey! 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> The thing about vile damage is that it's as good as permanent damage inside of the encounter in which it's dealt.




Its not that scary, really. Its good for evil monsters, if thats not a contradiction. But its not appropriate for epic monsters who are essentially unliving annihilation.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Afterwards, it takes a little more effort to heal, but nothing too tough.




Exactly its an inconvenience more than a 'cross to bear'.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Permanent damage affects all fights from here on out, limiting your resources unfairly based on the idea that "you knew the risks", which doesn't placate me at all. I don't know how anyone else feels.




I like the idea of putting the fear back into epic gaming.   

Remember ANYTHING is possible at epic/immortal levels. Its only a question of how high you have to go to get 'x' ability.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> I think some important questions are: how much permanent damage do these things deal? what is the modifier used for the attack? what is their rough CR? If these things balance out a minimal (I'm talking a few d3s here) amount of such damage, it might not be completely over the top, but I'm betting on it being ludicrous.




Permanent damage is rated as being the equivalent of five times the power of normal damage. So either the creature will be dealing one fifth damage for the same Challenge Rating modifier or the Challenge Rating modifier for its damage will be five times greater.

Its almost silly worrying about something like that when I created a Challenge Rating/Encounter Level system SPECIFICALLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACCURATELY RATING EPIC/IMMORTAL PLAY! 

The CR/EL system was born out of the Immortals Handbook, it wasn't simply something I was working at on the side. Did you think I would just abandon all that and start pulling challenge ratings out of a hat!?


----------



## Baronovan

Okay... everyone wants to either defend permanent damage or call me a coward... have at it. I still see a busted mechanic, 1/5th damage aside, not something I'm "afraid of", but something I think would convince me not to buy the product or use the creatures involved. 

And no, S'mon, no one has obliged me to include anything I dislike, that was my point. 

Frankly, U_K, I don't care how you want to phrase your philosophy on epic play, I'd rather suffer the possibility of permanently losing 1 hp/HD or even utter death _if a fight ends so badly that an epic character dies_ rather than anyone lose x% of HP permanently, win or lose. Calling me a chicken doesn't fix that, nor does saying anything trite like "you know the risks", or "you didn't have to get into melee with it", because all that boils down to is that you'd rather minimalize my opinion than consider that the power is a bit overmuch. If you want to instill fear in epic games, this is a shoddy corner-cut to doing so. As a final note, I'm not "scared" of your ability, I'm turned off by it and dissuaded. It's something I'd expect from a poorly designed 3rd party company. I actually had held you to higher expectations. I guess you will all have to agree to disagree with me.

As a PS, I'm not at all offended at all by the "chicken" comments, as most have been accompanied by the smiley things. I do feel minimalized, though, as it seems easier to "name away" my concerns as "fear" rather than an honest balance issue... but go ahead, multiple the CR modifier from damage by 5 and we'll see if that does squat to placate the people who gets forced into armchairs over this.


----------



## historian

Hey U_K!  



> Well from the movie, we can see that there wasn't that much difference between the top Jedi/Sith. So the main characters must have all been about 16-20th level.




That seems about right based on combat evidence, although I rather like the idea of a "full blown" Anakin Skywalker being about CR 40 or so, with Sidious/Yoda being around CR 30.

Anyway, I think the following conversion from SWD6 to Marvel works out fairly well:

Each D of an attribute in SWD6 = 4 points under the Marvel system (or 3 if you prefer, it's a bit of a judgment call).  Ex., Yoda's 14D in control = between 56 (Am) and 42 (In) in Marvel Ranks.  A lightsaber which does a base of 5D damage would = between 20 (Ex) and 15 (Gd) damage in Marvel.

F = Brawling
A = Dexterity
S = Strength
E = Stamina skill
R = The average of the character's Technical and Mechanical Attributes  
I = The average between the Attribute Perception and the Force Attribute Sense
P = The average between the Attribute Perception or the Force Attribute Control

As far as force powers are concerned, simply use the SWD6 mechanic and multiply by 4 (or 3).  Ex., 

Scale multipliers -- which are used to reduce D6 vehicles of varying size to the same D6 scale --  are as follows (I can explain these calculations if they don't make sense):

Speeder = Base attribute + 2D * 1.75 * Marvel multiplier (3 or 4)
Walker = Base attribute + 4D * 3 * Marvel multiplier (3 or 4)
Starfighter = Base attribute + 6D * 5 * Marvel multiplier (3 or 4)
Capital = Base attribute + 12D * 9 * Marvel multiplier (3 or 4)
Death Star = Base attribute + 24D * 33 * Marvel multiplier (3 or 4)

Thus, under this formula a heavy turbolaser from a Class II Star Destroyer would do 792 damage (roughly Class 1000) when converted to Marvel damage.  

The Death Star's Superlaser would do roughly 5280 damage (Class 5000) when converted to Marvel damage (16D (Superlaser base damage) + 24D (Scaling factor) * 33 (D6 Scaling multiplier) * 4 (Marvel multiplier)).

Because characters receive no scaling adjustments, their conversion is a bit more straightforward, but I think the conversions outlined above do a fair job of accurately mirroring the level of power between the systems.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Baranovan mate! 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Okay... everyone wants to either defend permanent damage or call me a coward... have at it.




Thats the spirit. 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> I still see a busted mechanic,




...and I value your opinion on the matter. But I just don't agree with you on this point, neither from a mechanical point of view, nor a philosophical point of view.

Mechanically I know its balanced, and philosophically I know that epic gaming has to expand in new tangents, not simply numerically, to actually have any merit. 

That means that given infinite possibilities, permanent damage eventually becomes possible. The only question is how powerful is it. Once we have that worked out, we can assign it to an appropriate monster. 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> 1/5th damage aside,




1/5th damage (or x5 CR mod for damage) I think is a very accurate rating of the ability. You disagree?



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> not something I'm "afraid of",




I understand that...I thought you were simply addressing the possible concerns of players. 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> but something I think would convince me not to buy the product or use the creatures involved.




Even though you haven't seen the (two) relevant monsters yet.
Even though the challenge ratings are accurate.
Even though I already pre-empted that it might be too powerful for some tastes and included a 'get out of jail' option.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> And no, S'mon, no one has obliged me to include anything I dislike, that was my point.




Well I can tell you there are two monsters in the preview that use this ability. So thats 2 from 35.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Frankly, U_K, I don't care how you want to phrase your philosophy on epic play,




Not even a little?   



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> I'd rather suffer the possibility of permanently losing 1 hp/HD or even utter death _if a fight ends so badly that an epic character dies_ rather than anyone lose x% of HP permanently, win or lose.




But that doesn't make any sense as far as I can see.

According to you its okay for a 30th-level Fighter (for example) to 'permanently' lose 30 hit points from an imposed constitution loss. However its not okay for a 30th-level Fighter to permanently lose 30 hp to a permanent damage attack!?

I mean maybe I am just not seeing the wood for the trees here but by the bristling beard of Odin I simply don't see any fundamental difference!   

You also go on to suggest that it would be much better for the character to suffer permanent death than lose some hit points permanently. I mean call me crazy but I just don't see the logic in that!?

Weighing up the permanent death of a character on one hand and a permanently reduced hit point total on the other is an easy decision to make.

S'mon (playing Hel): "Ha ha ha! Your days are numbered Thrin its either permanent death or the permanent loss of 500 hit points! Which is it to be fool? This'll teach you to mess with the random deity generator!"

Upper_Krust (playing Thrin): "Your reputation as the queen of of dead is justified as ever Hel. Curse that 97% roll. Decisions, decisions. I'll go with option B. That drops me to only 1000 hit points damn you woman. A pox be upon you...get your clammy hands off my hit points wench...AARRRGHH!!!... 

...sometime later. Right now get Odin on the crystal ball and tell him to sell my shares in Microsoft and invest it in amulets of epic health."



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Calling me a chicken doesn't fix that, nor does saying anything trite like "you know the risks", or "you didn't have to get into melee with it", because all that boils down to is that you'd rather minimalize my opinion than consider that the power is a bit overmuch.




You can sum all this up in one word. Tactics. 

Is it overmuch to use Golems or Demiliches on wizards, or Remorhaz or Umbral Blots on monks just because these characters are at a disadvantage!?  I don't think so. In such cases smart players adapt their tactics accordingly. Same thing here.  



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> If you want to instill fear in epic games, this is a shoddy corner-cut to doing so.




I disagree. The potential to take away the very thing PCs hold dear...without killing them. Thats how to add elements of fear without the finality of total desruction.

Unless you have a better way of engendering fear mechanically? I'd certainly be interested in hearing it.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> As a final note, I'm not "scared" of your ability, I'm turned off by it and dissuaded. It's something I'd expect from a poorly designed 3rd party company. I actually had held you to higher expectations. I guess you will all have to agree to disagree with me.




I don't see how you can draw these conclusions.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> As a PS, I'm not at all offended at all by the "chicken" comments, as most have been accompanied by the smiley things.




Glad to hear it dude. I can only speak for myself, but any such comments I made were intentionally light-hearted.

Though I do actually like the idea of putting 'fear' back into the minds of players. 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> I do feel minimalized, though, as it seems easier to "name away" my concerns as "fear" rather than an honest balance issue...




This is me remember. Balance is my middle name...of course the kids would make fun of it at school, but hey thats another story. 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> but go ahead, multiple the CR modifier from damage by 5 and we'll see if that does squat to placate the people who gets forced into armchairs over this.




Well if the worst comes to the worst we can always say its permanent constitution drain that can't be restored, then they'll be okay with it, won't they.


----------



## Upper_Krust

historian said:
			
		

> Hey U_K!




Hiya historian mate! 

Thanks for the conversion system, very interesting.



			
				historian said:
			
		

> Thus, under this formula a heavy turbolaser from a Class II Star Destroyer would do 792 damage (roughly Class 1000) when converted to Marvel damage.
> 
> The Death Star's Superlaser would do roughly 5280 damage (Class 5000) when converted to Marvel damage (16D (Superlaser base damage) + 24D (Scaling factor) * 33 (D6 Scaling multiplier) * 4 (Marvel multiplier)).




You know these two are very accurately converted, especially taking my tweaking of Marvel Superhero Weaponry to a proper scaling system.


----------



## Baronovan

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Hey Baranovan mate!




Hey there, U_K.



> ...and I value your opinion on the matter. But I just don't agree with you on this point, neither from a mechanical point of view, nor a philosophical point of view.
> 
> Mechanically I know its balanced, and philosophically I know that epic gaming has to expand in new tangents, not simply numerically, to actually have any merit.




Well, we're fit to disagree here, mate. I don't know what sky "x5" fell out of, but I don't think it's enough.



> 1/5th damage (or x5 CR mod for damage) I think is a very accurate rating of the ability. You disagree?




Yes. Very much so. It seems too arbitrary an ability to be measured mechanically. I know that you used your better judgment on the matter, but I'm not convinced there's any solution to a permanent damage ability.



> I understand that...I thought you were simply addressing the possible concerns of players.




I am. As a DM and a player, this ability concerns me very much.



> Even though you haven't seen the (two) relevant monsters yet.




Show me. I might quit complaining if I can see the hows and whys of this.



> Even though the challenge ratings are accurate.




This is a matter of opinion, and gauged on an arbitrary multiplier that might not fit the bill. How much playtesting has been done on this?



> Even though I already pre-empted that it might be too powerful for some tastes and included a 'get out of jail' option.




And for this we are all fortunate. 



> Well I can tell you there are two monsters in the preview that use this ability. So that’s 2 from 35.




Can't wait to see them.



> Not even a little?




Well, maybe a little.  Still, the idea that this ability _can_ be balanced is wholly a matter of philosophy--something you and I seem to disagree on.



> But that doesn't make any sense as far as I can see.
> 
> According to you its okay for a 30th-level Fighter (for example) to 'permanently' lose 30 hit points from an imposed constitution loss. However its not okay for a 30th-level Fighter to permanently lose 30 hp to a permanent damage attack!?
> 
> I mean maybe I am just not seeing the wood for the trees here but by the bristling beard of Odin I simply don't see any fundamental difference!




Well, the primary difference here is that the player would have to completely lose to suffer the effect, not merely exchange some blows before he realizes his career is about to end, win or lose.



> You also go on to suggest that it would be much better for the character to suffer permanent death than lose some hit points permanently. I mean call me crazy but I just don't see the logic in that!?
> 
> Weighing up the permanent death of a character on one hand and a permanently reduced hit point total on the other is an easy decision to make.




It was a suggestion meant primarily as emphasis to my position.



> Is it overmuch to use Golems or Demiliches on wizards, or Remorhaz or Umbral Blots on monks just because these characters are at a disadvantage!? I don't think so. In such cases smart players adapt their tactics accordingly. Same thing here.




Not at all, because none of these beasties cause permanent damage. 



> I disagree. The potential to take away the very thing PCs hold dear...without killing them. That’s how to add elements of fear without the finality of total destruction.
> 
> Unless you have a better way of engendering fear mechanically? I'd certainly be interested in hearing it.




I'd rather suffer such a loss by being killed and, say, losing a point of Con even with a _true res_ -- something so common in an epic game that the fear will be there. Epic characters do die, and they more often than not get a _true res_ to being them back flawlessly. Remove this ability and they'll be scared, I'm sure.



> I don't see how you can draw these conclusions.




I work in a huge (HUUUGE) gaming store in Orlando and have paged through some of the worst OGL texts in Creation. I've also seen real quality work. Depending on the CRs of these creatures, it's one or the other and I am leaning towards the latter right now.



> Glad to hear it dude. I can only speak for myself, but any such comments I made were intentionally light-hearted.




Naturally. I hope I haven't come across as too bitter or heated over this. I want to make my stance perfectly clear and hope to illuminate my path of logic.



> Well if the worst comes to the worst we can always say its permanent constitution drain that can't be restored, then they'll be okay with it, won't they.




At least they'd have to die (i.e. "lose unequivocally") first.


----------



## Impeesa

*Great Constitution [Epic]*
*Benefit:* None, really. But you did fight that one monster that one time. That was pretty cool.
*Special:* You certainly are.

--Impeesa--


----------



## Anabstercorian

Impeesa, VERY good point.  If a character fights these, they will certainly suffer a reduction in power that would demand some sort of alteration of their CR/ECL.  Am I mistaken in this, UK?


----------



## Sledge

Okay I think I am getting the problem with the whole CR and permanent damage issue.  Permanent damage is no more risky in that combat than Vile damage.  The fight is not harder with permanent than with Vile.  The only difference is that permanent damage is given a higher CR so an appropriate CR creature doing permanent damage will not be as tough as a normal encounter.  Permanent damage instead penalizes the characters for the next combat.  All in all this seems a little confused, but what if the characters are also using temporary HP?  They basically can ignore permanent damage then?
Or are temporary HP suddenly useless?
I do get the point of permanent damage.  Big event in a campaign where the players have to do a dangerous task that needs doing, knowing that it will be a major risk.  However the lower damage means it won't be a risk fighting the creature, just fighting anything else afterwards.  Given that it is epic I doubt it will really be permanent, but I also think that creatures like this had better have a note in the writeup stating that they are just intended to be low risk encounters that weaken the party long term.  In some games this can be a great thing to have the party weakened.  Restoration would require an actual quest or something, not just a planehop etc etc.


----------



## Kavon

Hey U_K :3

Just a little observation (since I'm a bit sceptical about the permanent damage bit too XP)



			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> That means that given infinite possibilities, permanent damage eventually becomes possible. The only question is how powerful is it. Once we have that worked out, we can assign it to an appropriate monster.



Isn't this a bit like the one where God creates something so heavy nothing in existance could lift it (the permanent damage), but God does it anyway because he/she/it can do everything (infinite possibilities)?

If anything should be possible, then it should also be possible to somehow undo permanent damage, though doing that might be really hard and such.

As in, if something can do permanent damage upon someone, something else should be able to undo it in some way (monster A makes the HP 'go away' and monster B undo's what something else did to someone at one time which brings back the HP from its awayness, or whatever )


Anyway, good to see some progress in the Beastiary 
Which one is coming next?


----------



## Alzrius

Hey U_K, 

I just wanted to throw my two cents in. As a generality, I kind of look askance on permanent hit point damage also, but find permanent death easier to deal with.

For me, it's a question of what seems fair to the players. Hit points are, relatively speaking, difficult to earn, and when earned a few in number. Losing them in what could be a fairly casual encounter (relatively speaking of course!) seems like it's taking away what the PC's have worked so long so hard for. What's worse is that it can neuter a character rather badly; imagine if someone got wounded down to 3 hp before the monster was slain...would that character be fit for many more high-level games?

A contrast here is permanent level loss, which previous editions of the game had; however, that arguement fals apart since the current version of the game made it easier to avoid those (and there were always _restoration_ spells).

Permanent death, on the other hand, has much more of a "you knew it was a risk, and took it anyway" feel (which is what I think you're going for with permanent damage). For one thing, permanent death isn't as immediate a threat as permanent damage, since you can always quit the field and heal up - the threat of losing your character is there, but it's remote enough to be thrilling and not terrifying (or worse, driving away your players with a sense of unfairness). Likewise, permanent death has a sense of rightness to it because that's how death really works...in a way it's almost a relief to get away from how easy it is to resurrect a character in D&D. The same isn't said for injuries (since D&D doesn't approximate lost limbs and such).

That said, I don't really care if the Bestiary has creatures that do permanent damage, as I trust how you'll do things (it helps that you're adding a way to heal it anyway), and can still see instances where I'd use them on my PC's.


----------



## S'mon

Sledge said:
			
		

> I do get the point of permanent damage.  Big event in a campaign where the players have to do a dangerous task that needs doing, knowing that it will be a major risk.  However the lower damage means it won't be a risk fighting the creature, just fighting anything else afterwards.




As far as I understand it U_K's CR system is about assigning an appropriate XP award for the challenge, not for assessing likelihood of victory - two different things which 3e conflates, often to detrimental results IMO.  Eg the permanent-damage beast may be an appropriate threat for PCs 5 levels below its listed CR but is worth more XP because it's so nasty.

I can see a case for creatures like this being listed with the lower CR but a x5 XP award.  Dragons should probably have been done like that in 3e also, as written their CRs are generally too low to provide appropriate XP for beating them.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Baronovan said:
			
		

> Hey there, U_K.




Heya mate! 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Well, we're fit to disagree here, mate. I don't know what sky "x5" fell out of, but I don't think it's enough.




Well I got the idea from the ELH (Epic Spell System), where to make a permanent effect the modifier is x5.

When tested this seemed to make sense. If you increase the modifier by more than that (for example x10) then the monster becomes pretty much irrelevant for its Challenge Rating, it will never be able to hit the opponent, so that renders the idea useless.

On average a Titan does 41 damage. For the same Challenge Rating we could have it deal 8 points of permanent damage instead. That is a massive step down, but then again as you note permanent damage is powerful. If we gave the Titan 41 permanent damage per average blow, then that would be the equivalent of a Titan dealing 205 points of normal damage per blow.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Yes. Very much so. It seems too arbitrary an ability to be measured mechanically. I know that you used your better judgment on the matter, but I'm not convinced there's any solution to a permanent damage ability.




See above.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> I am. As a DM and a player, this ability concerns me very much.




Hopefully I can help illuminate your path to logic. 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Show me. I might quit complaining if I can see the hows and whys of this.




I'll consider it.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> This is a matter of opinion, and gauged on an arbitrary multiplier that might not fit the bill. How much playtesting has been done on this?




The Challenge Rating system was playtested extensively so that I wouldn't have to playtest every monster.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Can't wait to see them.








			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Well, maybe a little.  Still, the idea that this ability _can_ be balanced is wholly a matter of philosophy--something you and I seem to disagree on.




I think it is balanced both mechanically and philosophically. You yourself mention below that it could work provided the challenge rating is balanced.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Well, the primary difference here is that the player would have to completely lose to suffer the effect, not merely exchange some blows before he realizes his career is about to end, win or lose.




I don't think so. I think you would realise the grip of entropy immediately for what it was, especially since the wounds are not conventional at all, the areas struck disappear entirely. Also, even if you didn't know what the monster was capable of (one of the first rules of 'the Art of War' remember) you would darn well know about it a second time. 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> It was a suggestion meant primarily as emphasis to my position.




Permanent death is not better than permanent damage. Temporary death is not that much of a frightening prospect for epic players.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Not at all, because none of these beasties cause permanent damage.




My point was to illustrate that against certain monsters you employ different tactics, especially when the monsters are notably powerful in one area.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> I'd rather suffer such a loss by being killed and, say, losing a point of Con even with a _true res_




But why is that prefeable though!? When the principle is the same!



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> -- something so common in an epic game that the fear will be there.




The fact that resurrection is so common and constitution so prevailant means they will not be afraid of it, and the loss is a paltry one at epic level.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Epic characters do die, and they more often than not get a _true res_ to being them back flawlessly. Remove this ability and they'll be scared, I'm sure.




No epic character is going to be fearful of losing a paltry 1 level (or 2 points of constitution) at epic level from resurrection. Also people have seen energy drain and ability drain before, these are not fresh ideas.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> I work in a huge (HUUUGE) gaming store in Orlando and have paged through some of the worst OGL texts in Creation. I've also seen real quality work. Depending on the CRs of these creatures, it's one or the other and I am leaning towards the latter right now.




So you're admitting it will be balanced if the challenge rating is right!?



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Naturally. I hope I haven't come across as too bitter or heated over this. I want to make my stance perfectly clear and hope to illuminate my path of logic.




I know mate, you seemed not unlike a concerned parent.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> At least they'd have to die (i.e. "lose unequivocally") first.




That could mean only a single roll of the dice though. Fortitude save vs. death etc.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey guys! 



			
				Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> Impeesa, VERY good point. If a character fights these, they will certainly suffer a reduction in power that would demand some sort of alteration of their CR/ECL.  Am I mistaken in this, UK?




Technically I think you could impose -1 ECL for every accruement of permanent damage equal to the characters level.

So for every 30 points of permanent damage a 30th-level character was 'carrying' they would be effectively -1 CR/ECL.

Of course once they go up in level this modifier could be reduced or disappear altogether.

The loss of 60 hit points would be a severe handicap for a 20th-level character, but not that great a burden for a 70th-level character.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Sledge mate! 



			
				Sledge said:
			
		

> Okay I think I am getting the problem with the whole CR and permanent damage issue.  Permanent damage is no more risky in that combat than Vile damage.




Well thats dependant upon circumstances, but I suppose its a fair enough appraisal.



			
				Sledge said:
			
		

> The fight is not harder with permanent than with Vile.  The only difference is that permanent damage is given a higher CR so an appropriate CR creature doing permanent damage will not be as tough as a normal encounter.




Exactly.



			
				Sledge said:
			
		

> Permanent damage instead penalizes the characters for the next combat.




It has that property too.



			
				Sledge said:
			
		

> All in all this seems a little confused, but what if the characters are also using temporary HP? They basically can ignore permanent damage then? Or are temporary HP suddenly useless?




As written, temporary hit points would be effected last (rather than first), by permanent damage.

It may even be that the only thing keeping a character alive is its magic spells/items.

Darth Vader: "Help me take this mask off."
Luke Skywalker: "But you'll die."
Darth Vader: "Nothing can stop that now."



			
				Sledge said:
			
		

> I do get the point of permanent damage.  Big event in a campaign where the players have to do a dangerous task that needs doing, knowing that it will be a major risk.




Yep.



			
				Sledge said:
			
		

> However the lower damage means it won't be a risk fighting the creature, just fighting anything else afterwards.




Deends on your tactics and your relative challenge ratings. You could destroy it without getting hit or get mauled by it and lose lots of hit points.

The DM might use the monsters as cannon fodder (if the parties CRs are notably higher), or the DM might use such a monster as the BBEG in which case it could be dealing 'normal' levels of permanent damage.



			
				Sledge said:
			
		

> Given that it is epic I doubt it will really be permanent, but I also think that creatures like this had better have a note in the writeup stating that they are just intended to be low risk encounters that weaken the party long term.  In some games this can be a great thing to have the party weakened.  Restoration would require an actual quest or something, not just a planehop etc etc.




...or even time travel*.  

*Note this isn't the 'get out clause' presented in the Bestiary.


----------



## Baronovan

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Well I got the idea from the ELH (Epic Spell System), where to make a permanent effect the modifier is x5.
> 
> When tested this seemed to make sense. If you increase the modifier by more than that (for example x10) then the monster becomes pretty much irrelevant for its Challenge Rating, it will never be able to hit the opponent, so that renders the idea useless.
> 
> On average a Titan does 41 damage. For the same Challenge Rating we could have it deal 8 points of permanent damage instead. That is a massive step down, but then again as you note permanent damage is powerful. If we gave the Titan 41 permanent damage per average blow, then that would be the equivalent of a Titan dealing 205 points of normal damage per blow.




Well, going to the epic spell system is your first mistake.  And frankly, there's no way that a titan hitting for 205 normal damage is the same as him hitting you for 41 points of perma-damage, or any other such ratio. Consider that, if a PC takes 41 or 8 points of permanent damage, that's 41 or 8 points of damage that _every encounter from there on out_ gets to "deal" to that PC "for free" -- they don't have to exert any effort because those HP (formerly part of a character's hard-earned build) are now "gone." That is the crux of my argument against the philosophy that such an ability can ever be balanced. You (not necessarily YOU) cannot predict the weight of every encounter from that point on and factor it into the perma-damage creature's CR. It's just not happening.



> See above.




Back atchya.



> Hopefully I can help illuminate your path to logic.




Good try, but my argument still stands.



> I'll consider it.



noldor@danbrijbag.com



> The Challenge Rating system was playtested extensively so that I wouldn't have to playtest every monster.




As a semi-avid coder here and there, I understand this principle, but I don't think testing a numeric generically is going to suffice. This monster tips the balance of every encounter that takes place after its own. Very... very hard to predict how this abiity will affect a PC down the road.



> I think it is balanced both mechanically and philosophically. You yourself mention below that it could work provided the challenge rating is balanced.




"Could", but most likely will not. See above.



> Permanent death is not better than permanent damage. Temporary death is not that much of a frightening prospect for epic players.




Maybe not on paper, but for everyone sitting at the table with their hard-earned builds... Again, knowing the risk in one encounter or not is almost irrelevant here, as this beast messes up ALL your future encounters.



> But why is that prefeable though!? When the principle is the same!




Because the PC must really lose to suffer this defeat. Give the beastie nasty damage and have it "take" a point of Con from anyone it kills. They come back weaker, but it's a more understandable set of circumstances.



> The fact that resurrection is so common and constitution so prevailant means they will not be afraid of it, and the loss is a paltry one at epic level.




I disagree. Given that resurrection is over-common, removing the ability to do so "flawlessly" brings back the doubtful application of such magic. It'd be like dropping the cleric back to using _raise dead_ instead. Beyond that, a 70th-level character who was on an even Con will lose 70 hp permanently from such an ability, but again only if they die. I think it "balances" better considering the effort some people can put into a character by then.



> No epic character is going to be fearful of losing a paltry 1 level (or 2 points of constitution) at epic level from resurrection. Also people have seen energy drain and ability drain before, these are not fresh ideas.




I disagree. See my example above. Beyond that, _energy drain_ can be fixed using _restoration_ spells. This ability, by default, cannot be cured at all. There's a vast difference.



> So you're admitting it will be balanced if the challenge rating is right!?




Hehehehe... sorta. Even then, see my above examples for reasons why this ability cannot ever be balanced.



> That could mean only a single roll of the dice though. Fortitude save vs. death etc.




As per D&D. Massive damage saves affect a game from level 1 on up. The _destruction_ spell has the same effect on anyone it affects, level 1 or 100. Even in the case of high saves, the autofail is "nature at work" in D&D.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Kavon said:
			
		

> Hey U_K :3




Hi Kavon mate! 



			
				Kavon said:
			
		

> Just a little observation (since I'm a bit sceptical about the permanent damage bit too XP)




I think I posted on that just a moment ago. 



			
				Kavon said:
			
		

> Isn't this a bit like the one where God creates something so heavy nothing in existance could lift it (the permanent damage), but God does it anyway because he/she/it can do everything (infinite possibilities)?




No. You are thinking about paradoxes.



			
				Kavon said:
			
		

> If anything should be possible, then it should also be possible to somehow undo permanent damage, though doing that might be really hard and such.




Absolutely. However to 'undo' the effects of entropy you would have to be a Time Lord. So thats not really a viable option for epic campaigns.

The optional ideas I had (in effect the cheats) were that a wish/miracle might restore 1 hp (definately incurring a loss of 5000 XP). Or that a god with the Healing portfolio who also had more Hit Dice than the monster who caused the damage in the first place could heal you with a miracle (again 5000 XP loss, but this time the damage restored would be equal to its divine bonus, rather than a single hit point).



			
				Kavon said:
			
		

> As in, if something can do permanent damage upon someone, something else should be able to undo it in some way (monster A makes the HP 'go away' and monster B undo's what something else did to someone at one time which brings back the HP from its awayness, or whatever )




True, however entropy is essentially nothingness, inertia. There is nothing to legitamately restore! Which is why you should really have to be beyond the power of the first one of entropy to overcome it.



			
				Kavon said:
			
		

> Anyway, good to see some progress in the Beastiary
> Which one is coming next?




- Bestiary (Preview)
- Bestiary
- Apotheosis


----------



## S'mon

In 1e let Wishes add hit points, up to the maximum a character could have rolled, so that's a potential way around permanent damage - in fact with 3e I'd probably let a real 5000 XP Wish give +1 hp/level*, 350 XP Limited Wish +1 hp.

*Before you ask, Craig, I know your Thrinians are loaded down with confetti-like Rings of Wishes from 1e modules.  Those are only giving +1hp tops.  >

I tend to see a permanent-damage creature NOT AS SOMETHING YOU SHOULD BE FIGHTING.  I'm not sure why this concept is so hard to grasp.  Maybe it's a 3e thing.  In 1e Legends & Lore, Death gets 10 attacks/round, auto-kill on a hit, no save.  So... don't fight him.  It's still worth statting such creatures, and there are ways to beat them - dead magic zones, spells etc.  Don't see it as an "orc with bigger numbers" waiting in a dungeon for PCs to find & kill.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Alzrius said:
			
		

> Hey U_K,




Hey Alzrius mate! 



			
				Alzrius said:
			
		

> I just wanted to throw my two cents in. As a generality, I kind of look askance on permanent hit point damage also, but find permanent death easier to deal with.




I had to look askance up in the dictionary, curse you.  



			
				Alzrius said:
			
		

> For me, it's a question of what seems fair to the players. Hit points are, relatively speaking, difficult to earn,




They are not 'that' difficult to earn.



			
				Alzrius said:
			
		

> and when earned a few in number. Losing them in what could be a fairly casual encounter (relatively speaking of course!)




If a CR 30 epic monster (for example) is a casual encounter, then PCs will have lots of hit points to lose.



			
				Alzrius said:
			
		

> seems like it's taking away what the PC's have worked so long so hard for.




Players will fear the loss of all thats important to them, loss of equipment/wealth, loss of worshippers (resulting in a loss of divine power) or even the loss of hit points, etc.

Such things can be replaced, but not restored.



			
				Alzrius said:
			
		

> What's worse is that it can neuter a character rather badly; imagine if someone got wounded down to 3 hp before the monster was slain...would that character be fit for many more high-level games?




Obviously if you lose a large percentage of hit points in this manner then you are buggered. Similarly with permanent death.



			
				Alzrius said:
			
		

> A contrast here is permanent level loss, which previous editions of the game had; however, that arguement fals apart since the current version of the game made it easier to avoid those (and there were always _restoration_ spells).




Negative energy can be countered by positive energy. However nothingness can only be 'negated' by somethingness. The only way to reverse having nothing is by gaining something, in effect levelling up (or increasing constitution). You cannot restore whats not there, only replace. In a way its not permanent hit point damage, but permanent hit point drain/loss.



			
				Alzrius said:
			
		

> Permanent death, on the other hand, has much more of a "you knew it was a risk, and took it anyway" feel (which is what I think you're going for with permanent damage). For one thing, permanent death isn't as immediate a threat as permanent damage, since you can always quit the field and heal up - the threat of losing your character is there, but it's remote enough to be thrilling and not terrifying (or worse, driving away your players with a sense of unfairness).




If thats likely to be the case use the options presented for restoration.



			
				Alzrius said:
			
		

> Likewise, permanent death has a sense of rightness to it because that's how death really works...




Exactly. Thats how death works, this is how annihilation works. Two different things.



			
				Alzrius said:
			
		

> in a way it's almost a relief to get away from how easy it is to resurrect a character in D&D. The same isn't said for injuries (since D&D doesn't approximate lost limbs and such).




Indeed.



			
				Alzrius said:
			
		

> That said, I don't really care if the Bestiary has creatures that do permanent damage, as I trust how you'll do things (it helps that you're adding a way to heal it anyway), and can still see instances where I'd use them on my PC's.


----------



## Darkness

Hint: If your user account currently is suspended, you're not supposed to simply register a new one and continue posting.


----------



## Kavon

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Hi Kavon mate!



Hey again, U_K 




			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> No. You are thinking about paradoxes.



Yeah, I know. That's what I meant though.. If everything is possible, then it should also be possible to 'undo' damage that cannot be 'undone', which is a paradox. But, I see it's not really a paradox with what you mentioned below this:



			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Absolutely. However to 'undo' the effects of entropy you would have to be a Time Lord. So thats not really a viable option for epic campaigns.



So it's not impossible to undo, you'd just have to have the right contacts  Makes for some nice epic roleplaying, I'd say 



> The optional ideas I had (in effect the cheats) were that a wish/miracle might restore 1 hp (definately incurring a loss of 5000 XP). Or that a god with the Healing portfolio who also had more Hit Dice than the monster who caused the damage in the first place could heal you with a miracle (again 5000 XP loss, but this time the damage restored would be equal to its divine bonus, rather than a single hit point).



Hmm... Maybe some Exp cost directly related to the CR could work as well?




			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> True, however entropy is essentially nothingness, inertia. There is nothing to legitamately restore! Which is why you should really have to be beyond the power of the first one of entropy to overcome it.



Yeah, but it is possible (if unlikely), so I'm satisfied 




			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> - Bestiary (Preview)
> - Bestiary
> - Apotheosis



Ah, ok :3

*remembers this would most likely be found on the site* >.<


----------



## Upper_Krust

Heya mate! 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Well, going to the epic spell system is your first mistake.




Cheeky. 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> And frankly, there's no way that a titan hitting for 205 normal damage is the same as him hitting you for 41 points of perma-damage, or any other such ratio.




So then how would you rate, say for instance, Vile Damage?



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Consider that, if a PC takes 41 or 8 points of permanent damage, that's 41 or 8 points of damage that _every encounter from there on out_ gets to "deal" to that PC "for free"




So mechanically it does exactly the same as energy drain and ability drain/loss and vile/sacred damage UNTIL such effects are restored/healed.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> -- they don't have to exert any effort because those HP (formerly part of a character's hard-earned build) are now "gone."




See above.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> That is the crux of my argument against the philosophy that such an ability can ever be balanced. You (not necessarily YOU) cannot predict the weight of every encounter from that point on and factor it into the perma-damage creature's CR. It's just not happening.




I thought I already explained how do determine its new CR.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> As a semi-avid coder here and there, I understand this principle, but I don't think testing a numeric generically is going to suffice. This monster tips the balance of every encounter that takes place after its own. Very... very hard to predict how this abiity will affect a PC down the road.




Hard, but not impossible. All we need do is determine the average after all.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> "Could", but most likely will not. See above.




Never say never. 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Maybe not on paper, but for everyone sitting at the table with their hard-earned builds... Again, knowing the risk in one encounter or not is almost irrelevant here, as this beast messes up ALL your future encounters.




Its powerful like that.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Because the PC must really lose to suffer this defeat. Give the beastie nasty damage and have it "take" a point of Con from anyone it kills. They come back weaker, but it's a more understandable set of circumstances.




Permanent damage stays, it perfectly suits the creatures concerned. However I may make the miracle/wish restoration legal rather than optional...I don't want to have to foot the bill for the tissues needed to mop up all the tears here.   

Of course that may reduce it to a mere x4 modifier. 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> I disagree. Given that resurrection is over-common, removing the ability to do so "flawlessly" brings back the doubtful application of such magic. It'd be like dropping the cleric back to using _raise dead_ instead.




In terms of epic play thats just nothing though.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Beyond that, a 70th-level character who was on an even Con will lose 70 hp permanently from such an ability, but again only if they die. I think it "balances" better considering the effort some people can put into a character by then.




For what its worth you have given me an idea for another ability (not the above, but something similar). 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> I disagree. See my example above. Beyond that, _energy drain_ can be fixed using _restoration_ spells. This ability, by default, cannot be cured at all. There's a vast difference.




Energy Drain is relatively weak, easily blocked, easily fixed and for many deities (who are immune) irrelevant. Same problem with Ability Drain/Loss.



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> Hehehehe... sorta. Even then, see my above examples for reasons why this ability cannot ever be balanced.




I think it can quite easily.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey S'mon! 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> In 1e let Wishes add hit points, up to the maximum a character could have rolled, so that's a potential way around permanent damage - in fact with 3e I'd probably let a real 5000 XP Wish give +1 hp/level*, 350 XP Limited Wish +1 hp.




Interesting idea. I might borrow it. 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> *Before you ask, Craig, I know your Thrinians are loaded down with confetti-like Rings of Wishes from 1e modules.




Yeah my top end wizards and fighters are running around with more jewelry than Liberace and Mr.T respectively. 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Those are only giving +1hp tops.




Not that fussed...I have other plans for those rings. 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> I tend to see a permanent-damage creature NOT AS SOMETHING YOU SHOULD BE FIGHTING.  I'm not sure why this concept is so hard to grasp.  Maybe it's a 3e thing.  In 1e Legends & Lore, Death gets 10 attacks/round, auto-kill on a hit, no save.  So... don't fight him.




He shows up when you roll '99' on the Random Deity Encounter Table...'00' is when you accidentally encounter the Cthulhu Mythos. 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> It's still worth statting such creatures, and there are ways to beat them - dead magic zones, spells etc.  Don't see it as an "orc with bigger numbers" waiting in a dungeon for PCs to find & kill.




...unless its Gruumsh's Fortress Dungeon.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Kavon said:
			
		

> Hey again, U_K




Hiya dude! 



			
				Kavon said:
			
		

> Hmm... Maybe some Exp cost directly related to the CR could work as well?




I quite fancy this limited wish/wish idea.



			
				Kavon said:
			
		

> Yeah, but it is possible (if unlikely), so I'm satisfied








			
				Kavon said:
			
		

> Ah, ok :3
> 
> *remembers this would most likely be found on the site* >.<




I haven't updated that in so long I feel ashamed to be honest.


----------



## Sledge

So if strictly speaking this is like unrolling hit points, then it would have to be minimized at 1/lvl rolls.  Anything beyond that is not unrolling HP anymore, but reducing constitution or HD.  The more I think about it permanent damage probably has a very big write up eh?  Because after permanent damage minimizes rolls, then it would have to have different effects depending on how dangerous it is supposed to be.
My thinking is that after minimizing HP any permanent damage would also reduce Con as appropriate for the HP loss.  To lessen this lethality I would consider having a rule that unless the damage is sufficient to actually reduce the con it is converted to normal damage.


----------



## historian

Hey U_K!  



> Thanks for the conversion system, very interesting.




You're very welcome.  It's a bit off topic with the current thrust of the thread but I know how conversions interest you.



> You know these two are very accurately converted, especially taking my tweaking of Marvel Superhero Weaponry to a proper scaling system.




What's interesting is that the conversions that emerged required no tweaking whatsoever.  Other than the "Marvel multiplier" which only represents the average roll of 1D6 (3.5 rounded up to 4), all other numbers are based on the SWD6 absolute scaling rule (+2D for speeders . . . +24D for the Deat Star) and the SWD6 relative scaling rule (which limits the highest number value assignable to each die in a given dice pool when smaller scale objects roll against higher scale objects), the application of both of which are canon in SWD6.  I found that the conversion system, which I think is rather intuitive, tends to work well from everything to lightsabers/force lightning to X-Wing lasers to the Death Star.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey guys! 

I am absolutely over the moon at the moment. Just watched the champions league final, and Liverpool (the team I support) making the greatest comeback in the competitions history. Absolutely unbelievable game!   

...I hope you were watching from Jamaica poilbrun mate! 



			
				Sledge said:
			
		

> So if strictly speaking this is like unrolling hit points, then it would have to be minimized at 1/lvl rolls.  Anything beyond that is not unrolling HP anymore, but reducing constitution or HD.  The more I think about it permanent damage probably has a very big write up eh?  Because after permanent damage minimizes rolls, then it would have to have different effects depending on how dangerous it is supposed to be.
> My thinking is that after minimizing HP any permanent damage would also reduce Con as appropriate for the HP loss.  To lessen this lethality I would consider having a rule that unless the damage is sufficient to actually reduce the con it is converted to normal damage.




I could be wrong (my head is in the clouds at the moment) but I think you could be overcomplicating things a tad. Or maybe I am, saying it impacts natural hit points first and supernaturally accrued hit points second. I'll have it worked out properly for the Bestiary though, no worries. 

I've also decided to be lenient and use the limited wish/wish idea as being able to bring back 1 hp or 1 hp/level respectively (incurring EXP costs of course).


----------



## Upper_Krust

historian said:
			
		

> Hey U_K!




Hiya mate! 



			
				historian said:
			
		

> You're very welcome.  It's a bit off topic with the current thrust of the thread but I know how conversions interest you.








			
				historian said:
			
		

> What's interesting is that the conversions that emerged required no tweaking whatsoever.




Well I think once you have a solid working base built on logic, its always easy to extrapolate.



			
				historian said:
			
		

> Other than the "Marvel multiplier" which only represents the average roll of 1D6 (3.5 rounded up to 4), all other numbers are based on the SWD6 absolute scaling rule (+2D for speeders . . . +24D for the Death Star) and the SWD6 relative scaling rule (which limits the highest number value assignable to each die in a given dice pool when smaller scale objects roll against higher scale objects), the application of both of which are canon in SWD6.  I found that the conversion system, which I think is rather intuitive, tends to work well from everything to lightsabers/force lightning to X-Wing lasers to the Death Star.




Very neat indeed. However, wasn't ship weaponry doubled when used against characters...unless I am remembering that wrong (it was 15 years ago after all).


----------



## historian

Hey U_K!  



> I am absolutely over the moon at the moment. Just watched the champions league final, and Liverpool (the team I support) making the greatest comeback in the competitions history. Absolutely unbelievable game!




Sweet!



> Very neat indeed. However, wasn't ship weaponry doubled when used against characters...unless I am remembering that wrong (it was 15 years ago after all).




Actually there are two rules that applied in this instance.  The first is that the SWD6 system had an absolute (in the sense that it didn't vary) "scaling factor" that was to be applied when objects of different scale made opposing rolls against one another.  It works(ed) as follows:

*Absolute Modifier*

Character Scale -- no additur (In other words, Darth Sidious' 15D in "sense" was 15D period).
Speeder Scale (think Luke's land speeder in Ep. IV) -- + 2D
Walker Scale (AT-ATs or the Juggernauts depicted in Episode III) -- + 2D
Starfighter (X-wings, Tie Fighters) -- +6D
Capital Scale (Star Destroyers) -- + 12D
Death Star Scale -- + 24D

This was the base modifier that, frankly, made total sense but didn't paint the complete picture.  For instance, the official Turbolaser damage for a Class II Star Destroyer is 10D.  After the Absolute Modifier was applied, damage was 22D (10D + 12D).  This is fine when applied as a damage factor against average characters (strength = 2D) or even exceptional characters (strength = 4D +2), but wholly inadequate when we take into account that Yoda, with a Control stat of 14D, can use the force power Absorb Energy in conjunction with spending a Force Point to boost his ability to absorb 28D of damage.  In other words, Yoda would stand a substantially better than average chance of completely absorbing, at no harm to himself, a full power frontal assault from a Star Destroyer.  That's absurd.

Recognizing this (apparently), the SWD6 designers also came up with a relative "scaling factor" to manage interaction.  SWD6 worked on a dice pool basis, and the relative scaling factor assigned a maximum value for each die.  For example, dice rolls above 2 for characters would be capped at a value of 2 when rolled against "Speeder Scale" objects.  This relative "scaling factor" was codified in a matrix.  Basically, I just worked out an expected value ratio If the maximum die value ratio for character to speeder was 3 to 6, then the multiplier was * 1.75 -- representing the average of 1 + 3 and 1 + 6 respectively and so on down the scale).  Reducing this modifier to an absolute value, I came up with the following (definitive) values:

Character = no modifiers
Speeder = + 2D * 1.75 * Marvel factor (*4)
Walker = + 4D * 3 * Marvel factor (*4)
Starfighter = + 6D * 5.35 * Marvel factor (*4)
Capital = + 12D * 9.4 * Marvel factor (*4)
Death Star = + 24D * 33 * Marvel factor (*4)

I realize that's a mouthful, but thus far, this formula yields conversions to Marvel that I think are pretty accurate.  To expand on my earlier example, a "full on" blast from an X-wing would do 257 damage (roughly Sh-Y) under the Marvel rules.  I can live with that.


----------



## Sledge

BTW still awaiting confirmation as to double quickened spells and such.

Now I just need a few more things for my next epic game.
*highjack interrupted please see "Epic Stuff Wanted"*


----------



## Cheiromancer

Sledge said:
			
		

> BTW still awaiting confirmation as to double quickened spells and such.
> 
> Now I just need a few more things for my next epic game.
> *highjack interrupted please see "Epic Stuff Wanted"*




Check out the feats on Upper Krust's website http://www.immortalshandbook.com/freestuff9.htm

The one you want is 



> *Metamagic Freedom [Epic]*
> You can stack the same metamagic feat multiple times.
> *Prerequisties*: Four metamagic feats, Spellcraft 24 ranks.
> *Benefit*: You can apply the same metamagic feat any number of times to the same spell, provided you have enough spell slots.
> 
> _eg. With this feat you could use a 9th-level spell slot to triple empower a fireball spell (for +150% damage)._
> 
> Normal: Without this feat you can only apply the same metamagic feat once to a single spell.





UK mentions that multispell becomes redundant with this feat.


----------



## S'mon

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> I could be wrong (my head is in the clouds at the moment) but I think you could be overcomplicating things a tad.




He's severely overcomplicating things IMO.  He doesn't like the idea of a Ftr-20 with Con 16 but only 42 (or 12) hit points so he's thinking of how to 'justify' the reduced hp.  But this is totally unnecessary.  The whole point is that the permanent danage creature Takes Away Your Hit Points.  Not your CON or your Level.  Your Hit Points.  Thus it can 'create' a Ftr-20 with CON 16 and a maximum hp total of 3.


----------



## Sledge

It may seem like I'm over complicating it, but that is how it has to be if it is annulling the actual hit points.  Otherwise it is just damage from a potential.  Even if it is unhealable that is not a lack of hit points, just an injury that won't heal.
UK implied that this ability actually removes the hit points rather than just damaging them.  Obviously this is a confused issue with the description.  What with the mechanics it sounds like damage.  With the description it sounded like a player has 250 HP and gets 100 perma'd.  The player then scratches out 250 and replaces it with 150 instead of marking down 100 damage.  So which is it?


----------



## Dyson_Omega

Seriously, maybe if you have to create a new rule to fix a created rule that was fixing a previoulsy fixed rule to fix another rule it's time to take your original idea and throw it out.


A 20th level fighter with a 16 con and a maximum Hit point total of 3 is a broken mechanic.

Forget what horse you rode in on or who you think you are because your writing some fictional book.

You can't seriously think that this is a good mechanic? You can't seriously think that taking the x5 multiplier from Epic Spell Casting (which has nothing to do with CR's) is a suggestion to fix a monsters CR who has this ability to permently hurt you? You can't seriously think that you have a more logical arguement by telling someone they don't like it because you say they're afraid?


----------



## Dyson_Omega

Darkness said:
			
		

> Hint: If your user account currently is suspended, you're not supposed to simply register a new one and continue posting.




Yeah, but it was genius.


----------



## Kalanyr

Well to be fair I think I can explain the problem with permanent HP loss. 

In 3e you can't permanently lose stat points unless your level 1 and getting raise dead or ressurection cast on you. Ability Damage and Drain are both cureable.

You can however lose levels (and this is okay because lowering your level means you're no longer you're previous level so the DM in fairness scales down the encounters and if he doesn't its still okay because your lower level means you get more XP/encounter which means that if not everyone is effected the person who was starts to catch up), this doesn't really work with lost HP, because lost HP doesn't effect your level.  So you still get the feeling you should be facing appropriate monsters for your level and in that case you're effectively doomed. Its far more depressing in that sense to lose HP than levels.

Also the entropy thing vanishing bits should logically easily be cured with the regeneration spell, its entire purpose is to grow back bits that aren't there. 

A level 20 character who loses 4 levels is a level 16 character, this is fair and recoverable

A level 20 character who loses 75% of his HP will always have lost 75% of his Hp comparatively to a character of the same level. And unlike the previous level 20 no matter what he does he's always weaker than a character of the same level, forever and ever and ever. I dislike the Firewight ability for the same reason. Its crippling a character without the dignity of defense. 

I suppose I'd dislike a con-sucking monster on death for the same reason, its fundamentally altering the characters ability to be as powerful as his level indicates. I wouldn't mind a monster that made True Ressing have the effect of costing a level though. 

I guess I'm weird and possibly my logic fails to make sense but thats my explanation.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Kalanyr said:
			
		

> I guess I'm weird and possibly my logic fails to make sense but thats my explanation.




In the abstract your logic fails because it discounts the possibility that the DM assigns characters with significant perm. hp loss a negative ECL modifier, making them effectively lower level and in just the same position as the newly 16th-level fighter.

In the concrete I don't know how U_K proposes handling this and I don't have experience playing at super-epic levels where this comes up.  (I haven't played a real campaign beyond 30th level, and I haven't done anything beyond the low 40s.)


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey there Dyson! 



			
				Dyson_Omega said:
			
		

> Seriously, maybe if you have to create a new rule to fix a created rule that was fixing a previoulsy fixed rule to fix another rule it's time to take your original idea and throw it out.




You are confusing me, the idea and application of permanent damage is straightforward...you can't heal the damage without extreme measures, its as simple as that. I haven't created any new rules to fix anything. So I don't really know what you on about here?   



			
				Dyson_Omega said:
			
		

> A 20th level fighter with a 16 con and a maximum Hit point total of 3 is a broken mechanic.




I disagree. 

Is a 20th-level Fighter with no hp broken? No. Simply dead until, in all likelihood they get the proper attention.

Is a 20th-level Fighter dropped to 3 hp with Vile Damage broken. No. Simply messed up until they get the appropriate attention.

How about a 20th-level Fighter dropped to 3 hp from normal damage, is that broken. No. Again, simply in trouble until they get the appropriate attention.

Permanent damage is no different, simply that it requires far more powerful means to recover from such damage (limited wish and wish respectively). 



			
				Dyson_Omega said:
			
		

> Forget what horse you rode in on or who you think you are because your writing some fictional book.




For someone who doesn't even believe the book is real I appreciate your interest! 

...oh and the horse is called Sleipnir. 



			
				Dyson_Omega said:
			
		

> You can't seriously think that this is a good mechanic?




Its a great mechanic.



			
				Dyson_Omega said:
			
		

> You can't seriously think that taking the x5 multiplier from Epic Spell Casting (which has nothing to do with CR's) is a suggestion to fix a monsters CR who has this ability to permently hurt you?




Well its clear that WotC believe that a permanent effect relates to a x5 multiplier, so that was the basis for my testing with permanent damage and as it happened, testing showed x5 to be fairly accurate and practical, as I commented on previously.

Logically permanent damage (as with any conceivable ability) must have a CR modifier, we simply have to determine what that modifier is. 

If you have a case for something other than x5 (or indeed x4 with the optional restoration from limited wish/wish as standard) then I would be most happy to hear what it is...? 



			
				Dyson_Omega said:
			
		

> You can't seriously think that you have a more logical arguement by telling someone they don't like it because you say they're afraid?




Of course not and that was never any part of the argument in support of the ability. 

I seem to remember we resolved this angle a few days ago, though I suppose that could have been when you were on hiatus. 

That said, as I have mentioned a few times already, I like the idea of monsters that will frighten epic and immortal players. Which to be fair, ability drain and energy drain don't really do anymore, given the propensity of ways to defeat them at such levels of power.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Kalanyr mate! 



			
				Kalanyr said:
			
		

> Well to be fair I think I can explain the problem with permanent HP loss.
> 
> In 3e you can't permanently lose stat points unless your level 1 and getting raise dead or ressurection cast on you. Ability Damage and Drain are both cureable.
> 
> You can however lose levels (and this is okay because lowering your level means you're no longer you're previous level so the DM in fairness scales down the encounters and if he doesn't its still okay because your lower level means you get more XP/encounter which means that if not everyone is effected the person who was starts to catch up), this doesn't really work with lost HP, because lost HP doesn't effect your level.




Except that I already stated exactly how lost hit points affects your CR/ECL. 

The problem faced would be exactly the same whether or not the damage was caused by normal or vile damage or constitution drain/loss, or energy drain. Permanent damage is simply far harder to heal.



			
				Kalanyr said:
			
		

> So you still get the feeling you should be facing appropriate monsters for your level and in that case you're effectively doomed. Its far more depressing in that sense to lose HP than levels.




I would use the word foreboding rather than depressing.



			
				Kalanyr said:
			
		

> Also the entropy thing vanishing bits should logically easily be cured with the regeneration spell, its entire purpose is to grow back bits that aren't there.




Think of it as erasing hit points so that they never existed. For instance a human can't use regeneration to grow a third arm.



			
				Kalanyr said:
			
		

> A level 20 character who loses 4 levels is a level 16 character, this is fair and recoverable
> 
> A level 20 character who loses 75% of his HP will always have lost 75% of his Hp comparatively to a character of the same level.




Technically not true, as I mentioned above, I already showed how their CR/ECL changes.

Also your above dichotomy was not really fair. A loss of 4 levels on a level 20 character would be consistant with a loss of 20% of a characters hit points - not 75%.



			
				Kalanyr said:
			
		

> And unlike the previous level 20 no matter what he does he's always weaker than a character of the same level, forever and ever and ever.




Unless he has access to, or the wealth to purchase limited wishes and wishes, yes.



			
				Kalanyr said:
			
		

> I dislike the Firewight ability for the same reason. Its crippling a character without the dignity of defense.




Be thankful that there is now a 'get out of jail free' card with regards permanent damage. 



			
				Kalanyr said:
			
		

> I suppose I'd dislike a con-sucking monster on death for the same reason, its fundamentally altering the characters ability to be as powerful as his level indicates. I wouldn't mind a monster that made True Ressing have the effect of costing a level though.




Glad to hear it. 



			
				Kalanyr said:
			
		

> I guess I'm weird and possibly my logic fails to make sense but thats my explanation.




Your concerns made sense to me, however, you may not have been up to date with my idea of making the formerly optional recovery method standard instead.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey CRGreathouse mate! 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> In the concrete I don't know how U_K proposes handling this and I don't have experience playing at super-epic levels where this comes up.  (I haven't played a real campaign beyond 30th level, and I haven't done anything beyond the low 40s.)




If this is as regards the effect of permanent damage upon characters then I have already mentioned how CR/ECL is modified. 

If this is to do with the possible recovery of permanent damage then I will be using the limited wish/wish idea as standard rather than optional. In fact I'd actually forgotten we used that method until S'mon reminded me a few days ago. DOH!


----------



## S'mon

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> If this is to do with the possible recovery of permanent damage then I will be using the limited wish/wish idea as standard rather than optional. In fact I'd actually forgotten we used that method until S'mon reminded me a few days ago. DOH!




I think the important thing with the wish mechanic is that it would apply equally well to an N/PC who had never lost hit points; they can increase their hp up to the maximum-that-could-be-rolled, so the Permanent damage really does have the same effect as if the hp never existed.  "Level of recipient" in hp may be too much for a Wish at higher levels; "1/2 level" might be better as that would be in line with the CON boost.  It's hard balancing Wish & Limited Wish in 3e because XP mean more to higher level casters... Maybe for Wish "1 hp per caster level, to a maximum of half the recipient's level" with Limited Wish being "+1 Inherent hp bonus, to a maximum of +10" would work, I think that reflects the relative power of the two.  Like I said, in 1e/2e 1hp/Wish worked fine, but 3e Wishes are more costly - nearly 1/3 a 17th level Wizard's max available XP.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey S'mon! 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> I think the important thing with the wish mechanic is that it would apply equally well to an N/PC who had never lost hit points; they can increase their hp up to the maximum-that-could-be-rolled, so the Permanent damage really does have the same effect as if the hp never existed.




Indeed.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> "Level of recipient" in hp may be too much for a Wish at higher levels; "1/2 level" might be better as that would be in line with the CON boost.




1/Caster Level I would have thought (rather than recipient). Limited to maximum hit points of course.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> It's hard balancing Wish & Limited Wish in 3e because XP mean more to higher level casters...Maybe for Wish "1 hp per caster level, to a maximum of half the recipient's level" with Limited Wish being "+1 Inherent hp bonus, to a maximum of +10" would work, I think that reflects the relative power of the two.  Like I said, in 1e/2e 1hp/Wish worked fine, but 3e Wishes are more costly - nearly 1/3 a 17th level Wizard's max available XP.




Limited Wish is approx. 1/17th the EXP cost of Wish.

So I think 1 hp for Limited Wish, 1 hp/Caster Level of Wish is fine.

Wish can grant a point of Constitution, which equals 1 feat, which equals Improved Toughness...in a roundabout fashion.


----------



## Dyson

Eh, the original Dice is back.


----------



## S'mon

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Limited Wish is approx. 1/17th the EXP cost of Wish.
> 
> So I think 1 hp for Limited Wish, 1 hp/Caster Level of Wish is fine.




Yup - certainly that's balanced between the two; as long as the GM isn't handing out Rings of Wishes it's fine.  A PC-cast Wish costs 5,000XP, 1hp/caster level seems in line with that cost.


----------



## Anabstercorian

Dyson said:
			
		

> Eh, the original Dice is back.




And we missed you so, so much.


----------



## Dyson

S'mon said:
			
		

> Yup - certainly that's balanced between the two; as long as the GM isn't handing out Rings of Wishes it's fine. A PC-cast Wish costs 5,000XP, 1hp/caster level seems in line with that cost.




Actually....no that's not.


Compared to the amount of damage being done, that wish is only going to compensate for what?.....one or two of those hits. It's still unbalance in the favor of the perminant damage.


I'd suggest maybe CL for limited wish and maybe a full heal from wish. Or here you go (let's pull another number from the air that has nothing to do with this system) let's do 5. Limited wish being 1/CL, wish can be 5/CL. See the connection man, 5 for 5000xp, and also 5 to cancel out the x5 that seemed good. I got it from epic spellcasting. It has nothing to do with this aspect of teh game....but it seems to fit. That makes it ok.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Dyson said:
			
		

> See the connection man, 5 for 5000xp, and also 5 to cancel out the x5 that seemed good. I got it from epic spellcasting. It has nothing to do with this aspect of teh game....but it seems to fit. That makes it ok.




This is intended as humor, yes?


----------



## Dyson

S'mon said:
			
		

> Yup - certainly that's balanced between the two; as long as the GM isn't handing out Rings of Wishes it's fine. A PC-cast Wish costs 5,000XP, 1hp/caster level seems in line with that cost.




I have to ask.


How?

How is that balanced?

The two spells working like that between themselves is balanced. 1 hp for LW, then 1/CL for wish.


But your tryingg to heal up to 400 hp or more from what this beast could do.


I don't disagree with you on them being unbalanced as in those two aspects of the limited wish and wish. But when you compare them to what they are supposed to counter-react, your ing crazy.


----------



## Dyson

CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> This is intended as humor, yes?






I'm just as serious as he is for saying that that's where he got his number from.


Just as serious as that serious face on your avatar.


If he squints anymore he's gonna drop a load.


----------



## S'mon

I can't believe I'm going to answer this question...

I was just saying that Limited Wish - 1hp is balanced against Wish - 1 hp x Caster Level.  Nothing about balancing of the CR of the Permanent Damage Monster, that's nothing to do with me.  I agree with the view that the CR of the PDM isn't really balanceable in terms of the default assumption that it's some random encounter down a dungeon meant to be killed; it's the kind of creature that most PCs would never voluntarily face so it's more of a GM's tool for scaring PCs.  The assigned CR can really only represent a reasonable XP reward for defeating it, not an estimate of its Challenge, because *even if it loses it can make the PCs regret fighting it * - and that is the notion people appear to object to.  In 1e you could say the same about level-draining undead.

BTW for the second time, I am not involved in designing any of U_K's Immortals Handbook, it's his own work and I probably know less about it than half the people on this thread.  The original Worship Points System was developed by me ca 1990 but U_K's version has had pretty much no input from me for years.  And I haven't created a deity-level monster for 10 years either.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Dyson said:
			
		

> But your tryingg to heal up to 400 hp or more from what this beast could do.




Wait -- do we have stats for one of these premanent damage creatures previewed somewhere I haven't noticed?  As far as I knew only U_K and the editor (  ) have seen these stats.

Further... at what CR does it do this sort of damage?  If this is supposed to be fitting for a 20th-level character 400 damage is a lot, but if it's for an 800th-level character it's pretty trivial.



			
				Dyson said:
			
		

> Just as serious as that serious face on your avatar.




It's an actual photograph of me.


----------



## Baronovan

I really hope we're not banking on 800th-level characters.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Baronovan said:
			
		

> I really hope we're not banking on 800th-level characters.




I really hope we're not talking about 400 damage.


----------



## Baronovan

400 "permanent" damage, you mean. Any melee muscle worth their salt at at least 40th level should be able to handle 400 damage before they need attention from the cleric.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Baronovan said:
			
		

> 400 "permanent" damage, you mean.




Of course.


----------



## Baronovan

Oh man, I love that show.


----------



## Sledge

Last Day of the month.  Are we there yet?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Sledge dude! 



			
				Sledge said:
			
		

> Last Day of the month.  Are we there yet?




Almost. I sort of took my foot off the gas for a day or two* when Anabstercorian gave me an extra month...sorry. 

*Although to be fair I did spend that time working on parts of the Apotheosis section, so it wasn't a full loss.

Also the wrangling over the permanent damage business on these boards took longer to settle than I would have otherwise liked. 

However the last few days of delay have probably been S'mons fault...but I won't hold it against him.  

So I am probably about 4-6 days behind where I thought I would be (thanks to myriad distractions).


----------



## poilbrun

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Hey guys!
> 
> I am absolutely over the moon at the moment. Just watched the champions league final, and Liverpool (the team I support) making the greatest comeback in the competitions history. Absolutely unbelievable game!
> 
> ...I hope you were watching from Jamaica poilbrun mate!



Of course I did... I watched the game in Spanish because ESPN in Spanish was the only channel I had which showed it, but I understand enough Spanish to understand that the Reds won! 

That was a very nice day for me: I saw Liverpool won the CL, AC Milan loose it (I support Inter), and I spend the morning on a ship and saw dolphins swimming around us. That's a day to remember!


----------



## Anabstercorian

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Almost. I sort of took my foot off the gas for a day or two* when Anabstercorian gave me an extra month...sorry.





You do of course realize that the stakes have been raised.  If you fail in completing your task with your extra 30 days, I will become a nemesis to you so rude and spiteful that Dyson will appear as a soft and fluffy fairy who leaves you small candies at night in comparison.


----------



## Fieari

Edit: {deleting this responce to Dyson}


----------



## Darkness

Please report Dyson if he reappears - regardless of what he posts. He's perma-banned.

Also, please don't respond to his posts.


----------



## Zoatebix

Now I don't feel so bad about reporting an only halfway-bad post by him the other day...


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey poilbrun mate! 



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> Of course I did... I watched the game in Spanish because ESPN in Spanish was the only channel I had which showed it, but I understand enough Spanish to understand that the Reds won!




I'm sure Isabelle could translate anyway, she speaks half a dozen languages doesn't she...brains and beauty - you lucky, lucky boy. 



			
				poilbrun said:
			
		

> That was a very nice day for me: I saw Liverpool won the CL, AC Milan loose it (I support Inter), and I spend the morning on a ship and saw dolphins swimming around us. That's a day to remember!




Very cool indeed. We can chat about it on msn next time I catch you online. I hope you have plenty of pictures.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Anabstercorian mate! 



			
				Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> You do of course realize that the stakes have been raised.  If you fail in completing your task with your extra 30 days, I will become a nemesis to you so rude and spiteful that Dyson will appear as a soft and fluffy fairy who leaves you small candies at night in comparison.




I know, I know.   

I didn't get to see Dysons recent outburst, must have been something colourful to get him banned...pity I missed it now, I like a laugh. Ah well.


----------



## S'mon

Hi Craig - just to say, the PCs in my game today were very impressed to come upon the remains of the Last Battle just 24 hours after it occurred - 40,000 dead Thrinians plus 70,000 dead Chaotics sure is a lot of corpses!


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey S'mon! 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Hi Craig - just to say, the PCs in my game today were very impressed to come upon the remains of the Last Battle just 24 hours after it occurred - 40,000 dead Thrinians plus 70,000 dead Chaotics sure is a lot of corpses!




Hansor: " You can't win, Vaneg. If you strike me down I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!"

All we need now is for Eldric to be Joraks son.


----------



## S'mon

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Hey S'mon!
> 
> 
> 
> Hansor: " You can't win, Vaneg. If you strike me down I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!"
> 
> All we need now is for Eldric to be Joraks son.





I told Ravi:  "I really want to say "You sense a disturbance in the Flux...."  but that would be wrong."


----------



## thundershot

*wanders into this note with his hands in his pockets*

HOLY MOTHER OF HEIRONEOUS! I want this book. In print. Yesterday.  I love your previews, UK, and... I would hate to wait until the end of the year before a possible print version comes out... but... Wow. Compiled, this sounds like a truly worthy book to add to my collection.


Thanks
Chris


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey there thundershot! 



			
				thundershot said:
			
		

> *wanders into this note with his hands in his pockets*
> 
> HOLY MOTHER OF HEIRONEOUS! I want this book. In print. Yesterday.  I love your previews, UK, and... I would hate to wait until the end of the year before a possible print version comes out... but... Wow. Compiled, this sounds like a truly worthy book to add to my collection.




I appreciate the interest. I'll be updating the website tomorrow with the latest news and some other stuff. 

I'm trying to get everything done as fast as I can without compromising the quality.


----------



## Anabstercorian

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Hey there thundershot!
> 
> 
> 
> I appreciate the interest. I'll be updating the website tomorrow with the latest news and some other stuff.
> 
> I'm trying to get everything done as fast as I can without compromising the quality.




It is in your best interest to compromise quality slightly if it will allow you to finish and sell your product by the end of June.


----------



## Baronovan

Quality is so subjective anyway. Some might really dislike the book no matter what you do.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey guys! 



			
				Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> It is in your best interest to compromise quality slightly if it will allow you to finish and sell your product by the end of June.




I know dude - don't worry. 

By the way that site update will have to wait until tomorrow, things seemed to get away from me today. I have the CRs for the monsters all but ready to add to the site, and a new review (The Book of Immortals no less), and an addition to the the personal stuff - specifically my favourite movies (which has been 90% finished for a while now, so it wasn't something I took time out to do). 



			
				Baranovan said:
			
		

> Quality is so subjective anyway. Some might really dislike the book no matter what you do.




Mistakes are not subjective.

As for the content, I suppose I am my own worst critic in that regard.


----------



## Anabstercorian

My deadline is for the WHOLE bestiary, if you recall, not the preview.  You may want to hurry.


----------



## Anabstercorian

21 days remaining.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey all! 

Interesting point to note, I was toying with the magic system last night and realised something I had previously missed. A flaw with a certain facet of all ultra high level spellcasting (epic spellcasting and even my own system*).

*until I corrected it of course.

I won't say exactly what it is just yet, but I think it has some exciting repercussions for epic games.

...including being able to destroy a planet (Earth sized) with one spell before 100th-level (although admittedly thats a totally min-maxed caster).

I still have to run tests, which won't happen in the short term since I am concentrating on the bestiary, but it should be interesting to see how it all pans out.

I'm curious what peoples thoughts are on the prospect of really high collateral damage.

Personally I think it makes epic ideas like the Rain of Colourless Fire and the Invoked Devastation plausible without having to make the spellcasters involved 1000th-level +.


----------



## Impeesa

For the love of god, man - you're going to keep seeing things to improve and add until you die of old age. Finish what you have and save the rest for the Revised & Expanded Immortals Handbook. 

--Impeesa--


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Impeesa mate! 



			
				Impeesa said:
			
		

> For the love of god, man - you're going to keep seeing things to improve and add until you die of old age. Finish what you have and save the rest for the Revised & Expanded Immortals Handbook.




I only realised the spellcasting thing at about midnight last night. I spent an hour examining it and my initial impressions are that its feasible.

Though I agree with you that I sometimes...okay all the time...seem to keep tweaking stuff. But what I am saying is that it didn't really eat into my time spent working on the Bestiary...this time at least.


----------



## Anabstercorian

20 days remaining.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Anabstercorian mate! 



			
				Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> 20 days remaining.




While you were here you could have at least addressed the topic at hand about massive spellcasting prowess.

I did some multi-tasking while I was out shopping there and it looks like you could destroy a planet with a 50th-level spell or thereabouts.

To put that into perspective the Seraphim (effectively Overgods) in the Bestiary can cast 33rd-level spells, although obviously they are not min/maxed simply for spellcasting.

Boccob the Greater God of Magic would be a 96th-level Wizard under my auspices, probably capable of 50th-level spells on his own (depending on Portfolios/Divine Abilities).


----------



## historian

Hey U_K.  




> I did some multi-tasking while I was out shopping there and it looks like you could destroy a planet with a 50th-level spell or thereabouts.
> 
> To put that into perspective the Seraphim (effectively Overgods) in the Bestiary can cast 33rd-level spells, although obviously they are not min/maxed simply for spellcasting.
> 
> Boccob the Greater God of Magic would be a 96th-level Wizard under my auspices, probably capable of 50th-level spells on his own (depending on Portfolios/Divine Abilities).




While I definitely don't want to encourage the re-invention of any wheel, doesn't this seem a bit overpowered on an ECL basis?  I mean, a 100th level caster with no templates could probably wipe out a planet.  By comparison, what could an ECL 196 Greater Deity do?  

Interesting.


----------



## Anabstercorian

19 and a half!

Okay, okay, here's my feedback: 50th level spells should not be blowing up planets, given the levels I presume you gain access to them.  Given how many critters can cast spells at high levels of power in your bestiary, it's something you'll have to deal with.  However!  It's not something you have to deal with yet, as you don't actually have to include all the rules for high level spellcasting in the Bestiary.  You can save it for Libram.  PRIORITIZE.  Follow through, man!  Finish the job and move on to the next one!

19 and one quarter.


----------



## Upper_Krust

historian said:
			
		

> Hey U_K.




Hi historian matey! 



			
				historian said:
			
		

> While I definitely don't want to encourage the re-invention of any wheel, doesn't this seem a bit overpowered on an ECL basis?




I sort of had initial reservations myself. But remember the BoVD Orcus could survive a 128 KT Blast in a low physical factor setting.



			
				historian said:
			
		

> I mean, a 100th level caster with no templates could probably wipe out a planet.




Well this is a 100th-level spellcaster who is completely min/maxed pouring every feat into this endeavour.



			
				historian said:
			
		

> By comparison, what could an ECL 196 Greater Deity do?




Defeat the 100th-level spellcaster. Then cast _deus ex machina_ to reverse the destruction the wizard just caused.



			
				historian said:
			
		

> Interesting.




I just like the idea that the Rain of Colourless Fire, Invoked Devastation and that sort of epic magic are feasible, because quite frankly under the official epic spellcasting rules they are not. Not by a long shot either.

Stuff like creating a planet should probably be just about feasible for a Greater Deity.

I know a lot of people will mention 40th-level characters in a 'ho-hum' way, like they are 'two-a-penny'. But actually getting to 40th-level fairly under the 3rd Ed. rules is not going to be easy! Its not like 1st Edition. But by the same token, the characters are 'pound for pound' far, far tougher. However, I think a lot of people are stuck in the 1st/2nd Ed. mindset of power to an extent myself included.

Immortal gaming has to mean something different, and I think the worship points system is that something.

But in a similar way epic gaming has to mean something different also. You certainly don't get a sense of this from the epic spell system because its all just so feeble. You want to be able to do 'epic' things. Teleport a Fortress (I need to watch Krull again), Kill and raise a whole country as Undead, Make a City a dead magic zone, Create a new Ice Age, Divorce a god from their divinity, Create an Earthquake thats 10.0 on the Richter Scale (the one in the PHB is 5.0 by the way), Summon all Dragons of the world, Place an entire continent of people in stasis, maybe Blow up a planet or two even.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hiya mate! 



			
				Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> 19 and a half!
> 
> Okay, okay, here's my feedback: 50th level spells should not be blowing up planets, given the levels I presume you gain access to them.




Totally min/maxed you get them at (roughly) 1/2 levels. Although that may not be feasible because you would have to keep your primary ability score equal to 10 + spell level.

But I have to ask why you should not be blowing up planets at 100th-level? What even makes you think there are ANY 100th-level epic spellcasters (non-deities that is)?



			
				Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> Given how many critters can cast spells at high levels of power in your bestiary, it's something you'll have to deal with.




Actually I won't have to deal with it because this new ruling isn't addressed in the Bestiary. Also even if I did address it (which would only take a single sentence by the way - its that simple) it wouldn't change anything in the Bestiary.



			
				Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> However!  It's not something you have to deal with yet, as you don't actually have to include all the rules for high level spellcasting in the Bestiary.  You can save it for Libram.  PRIORITIZE.  Follow through, man!  Finish the job and move on to the next one!




True, true.  



			
				Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> 19 and one quarter.




Make it 19. I am going out in 2 minutes.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> I won't say exactly what it is just yet, but I think it has some exciting repercussions for epic games.
> 
> ...including being able to destroy a planet (Earth sized) with one spell before 100th-level (although admittedly thats a totally min-maxed caster).




I have to say I'm totally unconcerned about this.  A single 50th-level character (reasonably martial) could probably single-handedly conquor any continent/landmass in my world; only logistics would prevent the character from taking over the world.  Being able to destroy it at 100th level just doesn't seem like a big deal.


----------



## Baronovan

But there's a big difference between being unbeatable in combat and being able to "hit" a planet so hard that it is destroyed. Certainly more than a +100% increase... IMO, at least, but as in all things we'll just have to wait and see.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Baronovan said:
			
		

> But there's a big difference between being unbeatable in combat and being able to "hit" a planet so hard that it is destroyed. Certainly more than a +100% increase... IMO, at least, but as in all things we'll just have to wait and see.




Yeah, but that happens over 50 levels... and it takes min-maxing and your most powerful custom spell.


----------



## S'mon

IMO spells should not be destroying (or creating!) real planets in any but the very lowest physical-factor & reality-factor settings.  Most creation myths (a) involve overgods and (b) involve shaping a pre-existing reality, often primarily determined by natural mechanistic forces - look at the Norse & Graeco-Roman creation myths.  Anyway, do you want PCs blowing up planets?  That's the question.  I don't.  And I don't need 50th level spells to explain the Rain of Colourless Fire, which was a group effort by a lot of Bakluni Archmages using an esoteric ritual and several artifacts...


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Baranovan mate! 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> But there's a big difference between being unbeatable in combat and being able to "hit" a planet so hard that it is destroyed. Certainly more than a +100% increase... IMO, at least, but as in all things we'll just have to wait and see.




Trust your uncle Krust! 

The mechanics are simplicity itself. Also the relationships between affect and effect are far more pronounced when compared to the current rules which makes things actually more balanced.

Philosophically I think it makes a lot more sense.

Using the current system of epic magic, you need to be almost 50th-level to cast things like Hellball. Thats 33% weaker than a quickened Meteor Swarm + a Meteor Swarm (Something you could actually do at 17th-level with a Greater Rod of Metamagic: Quickened Spell).

Theres just no perspective. Gaming to 50th-level even is going to be incredibly difficult. So it has to mean something above and beyond the sum of its parts.

It should be noted that most of the Forgotten Realms NPCs were actually converted to 3rd Ed. on a level for level basis, which is totally ludicrous given the difference in difficulty between levelling up in 3rd Ed. compared to previous editions.

In one relatively small region of Toril there are:  24th, 25th (4*), 27th, 28th, 29th (2), 30th, 32nd, 35th = 12 epic characters (13 counting Driz'zt who must be 20th+ by now), and thats only the ones  in the ELH, there are probably a dozen or so more that just haven't been updated yet.

*counting the 3 Manshoons.

By illustrating this I mean to point out that the Forgotten Realms make it look like getting to epic level is easy, but I no longer think thats the case.


----------



## CRGreathouse

S'mon said:
			
		

> And I don't need 50th level spells to explain the Rain of Colourless Fire, which was a group effort by a lot of Bakluni Archmages using an esoteric ritual and several artifacts...




I don't really see any problems here -- if there are mechanics that put such a spell at 50th level (which no participant can cast), the ritual is just allowing them to cast a single 50th level spell with much effort.  Presumably spells of similar level would also have been within their reach with different rituals and artifacts (of similar power).  Putting a numbr on it just allows for such horizontal change from a DM's perspective.


----------



## S'mon

I don't want 100th level PCs (or NPCs!) casting Rain of Colourless Fire at will.  According to my resident powergamer Wizard player the Epic Spell Seeds system is fine as is, he's been boasting of the horrible effects he'll be doing once his Wiz-18 reaches Epic.  BTW Craig I agree FR has too many Epic PCs, in terms of power gradient as I said a while back 3e levels above 10th are roughly twice as good as 1e for 10-20, more later (see my last article).  A 1e 30th is about as powerful as a 3e 20th.


----------



## Zoatebix

Just a heads-up - the last two entries on immortalshandbook.com are mislabeled as being posted in the year 2006.


----------



## Anabstercorian

18 days remaining.

Just to verify, are we talking about rendering a planet uninhabitable, by demolishing the atmosphere and underdark, or about blowing it in to a new asteroid belt?


----------



## CRGreathouse

S'mon said:
			
		

> I don't want 100th level PCs (or NPCs!) casting Rain of Colourless Fire at will.




At will?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey S'mon! 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> IMO spells should not be destroying (or creating!) real planets in any but the very lowest physical-factor & reality-factor settings.




Standard D&D *is* the very lowest physical/reality factor. 

A 128 KT explosion only deals 120d6 blast damage. 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Most creation myths (a) involve overgods and (b) involve shaping a pre-existing reality, often primarily determined by natural mechanistic forces - look at the Norse & Graeco-Roman creation myths.




Thats all well and good, but no deity, no group of deities, no overgod, no group of overgods even; is going to be able to create or destroy a planet under the official rules.

Also didn't you just get a loan of Wrath of the Immortals? Check out 'Shape Reality' pages 65-67. They had rules for creating galaxies even.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Anyway, do you want PCs blowing up planets?  That's the question.  I don't.




I think you are looking at this from the wrong perspective. Its not a matter of 'if' PCs can blow up planets its simply a matter of when. If an overgod can create a planet then you have to ask at what point does a mortals power rival an overgods...all power is relative after all.

Also its not like 100th-level+ PCs are going to pop up overnight. In fact if anything, in 3rd Edition they are almost never going to happen...as you very well know. The exception being people who simply start their characters at 100th-level just for a laugh, which makes your fears redundant anyway because they could just as easily create characters of 1000th or 10,000th-level if they so wanted.

Also Greater Gods in your campaign are 40th-level or thereabouts anyway. Boccob can barely blow up a balloon at that level using the official rules.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> And I don't need 50th level spells to explain the Rain of Colourless Fire, which was a group effort by a lot of Bakluni Archmages using an esoteric ritual and several artifacts...




Yes but the buck stops with me. I explain the esoteric. I explain artifacts.

Using the official rules you can't explain the Rain of Colourless Fire even with a Stone of Amplification (Overgod Level Uber-Artifact for anyone reading) and 50 Epic Level Archmages using a ritual with a 100 day casting time (maximum), each using an epic spell slot (max), each burning 10,000 XP (max) and each taking maximum backlash damage. They still couldn't do it! The epic spell DC is in the millions and that was just to affect an empire, not even a continent or a planet. Ironic as it is, nothing truly 'epic' is feasible using the epic rules.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Zoatebix mate! 



			
				Zoatebix said:
			
		

> Just a heads-up - the last two entries on immortalshandbook.com are mislabeled as being posted in the year 2006.




Fixed.

Thanks dude!


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey dude! 



			
				Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> Just to verify, are we talking about rendering a planet uninhabitable, by demolishing the atmosphere and underdark, or about blowing it in to a new asteroid belt?




Eventually anything is possible, so technically both. Obviously you could render it unihabitable with less power than blowing it to smithereens. However I haven't really 'went to town' on the math yet, I have only done some rudimentary calculations which look very promising.

It may be something like (and much of this is off the top of my head): 

- 20th-level spell = Teleport City
- 30th-level Spell = Stasise Country
- 40th-level spell = Dead Magic Zone (Planetwide)
- 50th level spell = Destroy Planet
- 60th level spell = Create Sun
- 70th-level spell = Summon Black Hole
- 90th-level spell = Move Galaxy
- 115th-level spell = Big Bang
- 116th-level spell = Bigger Bang  
etc.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey S'mon! 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> I don't want 100th level PCs (or NPCs!) casting Rain of Colourless Fire at will.




Why not though?



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> According to my resident powergamer Wizard player the Epic Spell Seeds system is fine as is, he's been boasting of the horrible effects he'll be doing once his Wiz-18 reaches Epic.




Trust me. I honestly wouldn't worry about epic spells if I were you S'mon. 

Not to mention that each epic spell costs roughly 250,000 GP + and 10,000 XP + to develop (for the absolute weakest of epic spells that is).

Here is one of the average epic spells: *Greater Ruin*: Casting Time - 1 round, Range 12,000 feet, Target - One Creature or 10x10 cube of non-living matter; Damage 35d6 (non-elemental); Fortitude save for half. 2000 EXP burn per use.

Costs 531,000 GP and 21,240 XP to develop. 

If he min/maxes he should be able to cast that by about 30-35th-level. 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> BTW Craig I agree FR has too many Epic PCs, in terms of power gradient as I said a while back 3e levels above 10th are roughly twice as good as 1e for 10-20, more later (see my last article).  A 1e 30th is about as powerful as a 3e 20th.




I agree.


----------



## Cheiromancer

Stop teasing us!  

These rules won't be released for months, and it is just cruel to dangle these tidbits in front of us.


----------



## Anabstercorian

The monster book will be released in just 18 days, though.

*Won't it, Upper Krust?  After all, it would be a shame if someone were to EAT YOUR DOG.*


----------



## S'mon

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Using the official rules you can't explain the Rain of Colourless Fire even with a Stone of Amplification (Overgod Level Uber-Artifact for anyone reading) and 50 Epic Level Archmages using a ritual with a 100 day casting time (maximum), each using an epic spell slot (max), each burning 10,000 XP (max) and each taking maximum backlash damage. They still couldn't do it! The epic spell DC is in the millions and that was just to affect an empire, not even a continent or a planet. Ironic as it is, nothing truly 'epic' is feasible using the epic rules.




Well in my 1e game it was Bakluni Archmages with 'Fire Rods of Sueloise' and a Stone of Amplification and funnily enough it all worked out ok...  In fact it was done again on Ea (my main game world) on a smaller scale when Graz'zt used a fire rod + Stone to destroy Cartheos & Kormir in a Rain of Colourless Fire.  When he tried to do it again on Mystara the Stone imploded and created a 60-mile crater in Ylaruam (destroying Ylaruam).    
- All that was done using the rules I had for Stones, Fire Rods et al.


----------



## S'mon

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Hey S'mon!
> 
> Why not though?
> 
> Trust me. I honestly wouldn't worry about epic spells if I were you S'mon.




Why not - so I can actually GM a stable campaign that includes 100th level characters.  Of course converting from 1e 400hp Greater Gods start at 40th level, a few more if their 1e levels warrant it (and Thrin is, what, 44th?) but Doomstar works out at nearly 100th AIR - he can flatten cities at will but he certainly can't destroy planets!  If you make it that 100th level spellcasters can destroy planets then I'd have to halve Doomstar's caster level or somesuch.  

Also, moving away from my specific case, at a typical advancement rate of 3 sessions/level in 3e people who play most days - say 300 days/year - can be 100th in a year!  Even at standard rate of 20 levels/year 100th is easily attainable in 5 years' play - and we played a similar amount of sessions in 1e.  

10,000 th level casters destroying planets would be ok, if you insist.  100th is far far too low IMO.

Edit: Epic spells - I think Ravi is primarily wanting to use an epic spell seed to get permanent +20 Natural Armour - which IMC is probably a bigger deal than any fireball style blast-magic.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Cheiromancer said:
			
		

> Stop teasing us!
> 
> These rules won't be released for months, and it is just cruel to dangle these tidbits in front of us.




Sorry mate...got you curious though didn't it. 

I'm just trying to put the *epic* back into epic level gaming.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey S'mon! 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Well in my 1e game




This ain't 1e though. 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> it was Bakluni Archmages with 'Fire Rods of Sueloise'




Ironic that the Bakluni used weapons of Suel construction against the Suel. 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> and a Stone of Amplification




I was always curious how the Invoked Devastation was carried out if the Stone was used for the Rain of Colourless Fire?



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> and funnily enough it all worked out ok...  In fact it was done again on Ea (my main game world) on a smaller scale when Graz'zt used a fire rod + Stone to destroy Cartheos & Kormir in a Rain of Colourless Fire.  When he tried to do it again on Mystara the Stone imploded and created a 60-mile crater in Ylaruam (destroying Ylaruam).
> - All that was done using the rules I had for Stones, Fire Rods et al.




Well it 'worked out' because you added an uber artifact (even though it would be classed as a minor artifact because there are dozens of them) to the equation, an artifact that almost certainly no overgod could have created.

It was a case of A + B = C

Where 'A' was the actual magical power and 'C' was the results of the Rain of Colourless Fire. You simply created 'B' to bridge the gap.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hello again! 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Why not - so I can actually GM a stable campaign that includes 100th level characters.




What is so significant about '100th-level'? Why do you 'need' it and more to the point why do you need it to be so feeble?



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Of course converting from 1e 400hp Greater Gods start at 40th level,




In S'mons campaign this is folks, not the Immortals Handbook. 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> a few more if their 1e levels warrant it (and Thrin is, what, 44th?) but Doomstar works out at nearly 100th AIR - he can flatten cities at will but he certainly can't destroy planets!




When initially created Doomstar was, in terms of power:

Overgod > Doomstar > Greater God (Correct!?)

As such when you convert using your system we get:

('Typical') Overgods 61st-level > Doomstar > Greater Gods 37th-level.

If you change the hp divider to 4 (as I suggest on the website) that becomes:

Overgods 65th-level > Doomstar > Greater Gods 40th-level

Either way, Doomstar roughly ends up at between 49-52nd level (Maybe 3 or 4 levels higher to balance his lack of divinity).

This means that a totally min/maxed Doomstar (which I don't think he is) would be able to cast maybe 28th-level spells, although far more likely 21st or thereabouts. Which, coincidently enough corresponds to City level devastation  (which you yourself admitted Doomstar was capable of 'at will') using my proposed changes to epic magic.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> If you make it that 100th level spellcasters can destroy planets then I'd have to halve Doomstar's caster level or somesuch.




Well you know I'd really feel terrible having to impose upon you so vast an effort. 

How many times have you used Doomstar in the past 10 years again!? None is it perchance?  



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Also, moving away from my specific case, at a typical advancement rate of 3 sessions/level in 3e people who play most days - say 300 days/year - can be 100th in a year!  Even at standard rate of 20 levels/year 100th is easily attainable in 5 years' play - and we played a similar amount of sessions in 1e.




Your suggestion of 100 levels in a year is implausible and the idea of 100 levels in 5 years is unlikely.

It should be noted that although Thrin was 117th-level in 1e, he would be nowhere near that figure had we applied the 3rd Edition methods for advancement and you know it. You even converted him to about 44th, which I think is probably a fair appraisal of where he would actually be. 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> 10,000 th level casters destroying planets would be ok,




Funnily enough they still wouldn't be powerful enough using the epic rules. 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> if you insist.




My friend, I'll say it clear
I'll state my case, of which I'm certain



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> 100th is far far too low IMO.




I planned each charted course, each careful step along the byway
And more, much more than this, I did it my way





			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Edit: Epic spells - I think Ravi is primarily wanting to use an epic spell seed to get permanent +20 Natural Armour - which IMC is probably a bigger deal than any fireball style blast-magic.




Did I mention the epic spell system is also unbalanced? 

The funny thing is he could just as easily make that a +40 Natural Armour bonus for the same GP/XP cost, by increasing the casting time and taking a little backlash damage. 

...and that spell would be a far cheaper spell than Greater Ruin. 

One thing I have noticed about the Armour Spell Seed in the ELH is that making it a Deflection bonus instead of an Armour or Natural Armour bonus is rated as five times more costly an increase - which is so insane it must be a mistake.

Base DC is 14 (for +4 AC bonus of any type) +2/point of armour/natural armour and +10/point of deflection etc.

While the Fortify Spell Seed Grants:

Base DC is 17 (base +1 Natural Armour) +4 DC/ point of natural armour.

So if you wanted a +20 AC bonus.

It would be DC 46 using the Armour Spell Seed, DC 154 for a deflection bonus using the armour spell seed and DC 93 using the Fortify Spell Seed. Nice and balanced eh! Can you anticipate which one your wizard wants to use!  

I would Hazard a guess and say the Armour Spell Seed is perhaps broken.


----------



## Cheiromancer

Folks, let's not argue with UK.  If he's rebutting our points, it means he is not finishing the Bestiary!


----------



## S'mon

>>Ironic that the Bakluni used weapons of Suel construction against the Suel. <<

Who said they were Suel construction?  The Fire Rods of Sueloise (named as such in 1e Greyhawk Adventures, not by me) were named such, probably erroneously, by those who discovered them centuries later.  Their original name is unknown, but they were most likely crafted by the Bakluni, or discovered by them, or gifted from Incabulos.

>>I was always curious how the Invoked Devastation was carried out if the Stone was used for the Rain of Colourless Fire?<<

AIR the Invoked Devastation was the primary strike by the Suel which involved merging the Baklunish Empire with Hades; causing it to corrode and be overrun with Hordlings.  I believe they used the _Bringer of Doom _ artifact - check the 1e  MM2 entry "Hordling".  I'm guessing the Bringer of Doom was a Theorpart, you could always ask EGG.

>>Well it 'worked out' because you added an uber artifact (even though it would be classed as a minor artifact because there are dozens of them) to the equation, an artifact that almost certainly no overgod could have created.<<

IMC the Stones are Eldren and they have much higher Reality, Physical & Magical factors than the planes of the local Sphere.

Obviously the Rain & Devastation were created by EGG, you can ask him how he justifies them in 3e rules if you like.


----------



## S'mon

Cheiromancer said:
			
		

> Folks, let's not argue with UK.




Oh, ok then...


----------



## Upper_Krust

S'mon said:
			
		

> Oh, ok then...




Feel free to reply to my previous post. 

...and I don't really see EGG as an authority on 3rd edition epic spell mechanics, though indeed it would be interesting to hear his comments on the Invoked Devastation/Rain of Colourless Fire. However I know from past discussions with him that he mentioned the Theorpart was a plot device rather than something he had given notion to 'stat out'.


----------



## Anabstercorian

17 days.  I have chosen what to flavor your dog with.


----------



## Kerrick

> I won't say exactly what it is just yet, but I think it has some exciting repercussions for epic games.




You know, you're just evil... I've been waiting for some tidbits on your epic spell system, and now you dangle this in front of us. I tell you...



> In one relatively small region of Toril there are: 24th, 25th (4*), 27th, 28th, 29th (2), 30th, 32nd, 35th = 12 epic characters (13 counting Driz'zt who must be 20th+ by now), and thats only the ones in the ELH, there are probably a dozen or so more that just haven't been updated yet.




I'm probably nitpicking, but in what "relatively small region" are you putting all these characters? Halaster's in Waterdeep, Elminster's in Shadowdale, Manshoon is in Citadel Raven, The Simbul is in Rashemen (or somewhere around there), and that priestess of Auril lives somewhere near the Great Glacier. And yes, Driz'zt is over 20... I think he's 23-24 now.



> By illustrating this I mean to point out that the Forgotten Realms make it look like getting to epic level is easy, but I no longer think thats the case.




I dunno.. the common complain I'm seeing is that characters level too fast. Our group went from 1st (just beforer 3E came along) to 29th-31st in about 3 years.



> It may be something like (and much of this is off the top of my head):
> 
> - 20th-level spell = Teleport City
> - 30th-level Spell = Stasise Country
> - 40th-level spell = Dead Magic Zone (Planetwide)
> - 50th level spell = Destroy Planet
> - 60th level spell = Create Sun
> - 70th-level spell = Summon Black Hole
> - 90th-level spell = Move Galaxy




Granted that this is off the top of your head, I think you're scaling them a bit too quickly. Teleport city is about right (I have one based on the 2E estate transference that's L22). Placing an entire country under stasis I'd place around 35; a planet-wide dead zone... umm, around 60? Destroying a planet is hefty; my DM's old group had two spells, one called hammer strike that made the core of the world ring (created earthquakes all over the place for a month afterwards, but required the sacrifice of 1.5 million XP in magic items and 850 levels of spellcasters (all 10th+ level); the other was called earthwrack - it welded all the continental plates and recracked them. The second spell was cast only once, and then only partially; even then it very nearly wiped out all life on the planet, and eradicated winter for the next 500 years. I'm not sure what levels those were in 1E, though. I'd have to agree with S'mon - spells that create/destroy matter on a galactic scale should be huge... at least 70th (IOW, only accessible by a number of extremely high-level beings - likely gods - getting together in a ritual to cast them).


----------



## S'mon

>>What is so significant about '100th-level'? Why do you 'need' it and more to the point why do you need it to be so feeble?<<

You seem to have overlooked that:

1.  In my conversion Greater Gods start at 40th & Doomstar is 96th, so 100th is very high

but

2. In your standard conversion Doomstar would be ca 348th level, Thrin is over 80th (+ a divine CR mod presumably), and apparently lots of critters are 100+

So letting 100th levellers destroy planets will have far more impact in your 'official' rules than in my game.

>>When initially created Doomstar was, in terms of power:

Overgod > Doomstar > Greater God (Correct!?)<<

He was much higher level than any Overgod - Doomstar 500th, Overgods ca 100th in their highest class.  He had less hit points though, being single-classed M_U - ca 540 hp as opposed to 1000 for an Overgod.  I'd say he was more powerful than an Overgod on neutral terrain but would not wish to face Ahriman on his home plane.

>>As such when you convert using your system we get:

('Typical') Overgods 61st-level > Doomstar > Greater Gods 37th-level.<<

Nope.

>>Either way, Doomstar roughly ends up at between 49-52nd level (Maybe 3 or 4 levels higher to balance his lack of divinity).<<

He's 96th level by my conversion.  I suspect Overgods are lower than that, probably 60-80.  Plus CR divinity mods of course.


>>This means that a totally min/maxed Doomstar (which I don't think he is) would be able to cast maybe 28th-level spells, although far more likely 21st or thereabouts. Which, coincidently enough corresponds to City level devastation  (which you yourself admitted Doomstar was capable of 'at will') using my proposed changes to epic magic.<<

I think arguing about _my_ campaign is slightly pointless, since I am free to ignore your work if it doesn't suit me.  You should think about how having 100th-levellers destroy planets affects your own power gradient, where AIR Greater Gods are around 100th level?  Can Boccob destroy a planet?

>>Your suggestion of 100 levels in a year is implausible and the idea of 100 levels in 5 years is unlikely.<<

I'd say it was unlikely, though mostly because GMing high level 3e routinely is a pain in the arse and few GMs will stick with it that long.  1e was far easier.

>>It should be noted that although Thrin was 117th-level in 1e, he would be nowhere near that figure had we applied the 3rd Edition methods for advancement and you know it. You even converted him to about 44th, which I think is probably a fair appraisal of where he would actually be. <<

I was more interested in appraising actual relative power rather than advancement, but you're probably right.


>>The funny thing is he could just as easily make that a +40 Natural Armour bonus for the same GP/XP cost, by increasing the casting time and taking a little backlash damage. 

...and that spell would be a far cheaper spell than Greater Ruin. 

One thing I have noticed about the Armour Spell Seed in the ELH is that making it a Deflection bonus instead of an Armour or Natural Armour bonus is rated as five times more costly an increase - which is so insane it must be a mistake.

Base DC is 14 (for +4 AC bonus of any type) +2/point of armour/natural armour and +10/point of deflection etc.

While the Fortify Spell Seed Grants:

Base DC is 17 (base +1 Natural Armour) +4 DC/ point of natural armour.

So if you wanted a +20 AC bonus.

It would be DC 46 using the Armour Spell Seed, DC 154 for a deflection bonus using the armour spell seed and DC 93 using the Fortify Spell Seed. Nice and balanced eh! Can you anticipate which one your wizard wants to use!  

I would Hazard a guess and say the Armour Spell Seed is perhaps broken.<<

OK, I'll look at increasing the cost of a Nat Armour Bonus, maybe it should be similar to a Deflection bonus given that they both cost the same in magic items cost.  Actually the obvious sensible thing to do would be to not make the DC linear, but to use the same formula as for magic items. I'm thinking 10 +  (Bonus squared x 4)  for natural armour  - so +4 would be base DC 74.  Sound about right?  For regular Armour bonus I'd use 10 + (Bonus squared x2) since item Armour bonuses are half as expensive as natural armour, and also IMC Nat armour is harder to come by.

Edit:  My copy of Fortify doesn't mention it being able to improve AC.


----------



## S'mon

>>- 20th-level spell = Teleport City
- 30th-level Spell = Stasise Country
- 40th-level spell = Dead Magic Zone (Planetwide)
- 50th level spell = Destroy Planet
- 60th level spell = Create Sun
- 70th-level spell = Summon Black Hole
- 90th-level spell = Move Galaxy <<

The first 3 are arbitrary in that their difficulty mostly depends on how magic works.  Plane shifting a city might be much easier than teleporting it to a designated location, for instance.  And creating a planetary dead magic zone might be far easier than stasising a country - after all Temp Stasis is 9th level, 1 target, where A-M shell is 6th and affects an area.

The other effects aren't really comparable to me, they seem on a different scale with each increment being ca 100 billion times more powerful than the one before, except summoning a black hole is only about 13 times as difficult as creating a sun-sized star.  So I think your scale is kinda wonky.  

If I were you using your level gradient I'd maybe put plane-shifting a city-sized area at 20th, a global dead magic zone at 40th (depending on duration), scouring a planet with windstorms 50th, a global stasis zone at 60th, vapourising a planet with a word ca 500th, creating a (real-world) sun maybe 5000th, creating a black hole ca 5050,  moving a (real-world) galaxy 50,000.  But you should be considering the physics of the universe - if the sun is a 6' orb drawn across the sky by a chariot, it may be quite easy to create.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Jerrick matey! 



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> You know, you're just evil... I've been waiting for some tidbits on your epic spell system, and now you dangle this in front of us. I tell you...








			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> I'm probably nitpicking, but in what "relatively small region" are you putting all these characters? Halaster's in Waterdeep, Elminster's in Shadowdale, Manshoon is in Citadel Raven, The Simbul is in Rashemen (or somewhere around there), and that priestess of Auril lives somewhere near the Great Glacier. And yes, Driz'zt is over 20... I think he's 23-24 now.




Relatively small in terms of the whole planet. You have all the other continents and major territories. You could easily be looking at 100+ epic characters across Faerun. That said I don't think its too big a problem, and might even make sense dependant upon the population.

You can have 1 20th-level character per million people, and 1 30th-level character per billion (of course these are for typical averages not hard rules).



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> I dunno.. the common complain I'm seeing is that characters level too fast. Our group went from 1st (just beforer 3E came along) to 29th-31st in about 3 years.




Using the 3rd Ed. EXP rules as written I would say that is about right. Although I know some people think that is too quick...I don't, primarily because it gets more people into epic/immortal levels faster. 



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> Granted that this is off the top of your head, I think you're scaling them a bit too quickly.




Its possible I suppose.

...but I doubt I was out by that much. 



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> Teleport city is about right (I have one based on the 2E estate transference that's L22). Placing an entire country under stasis I'd place around 35; a planet-wide dead zone... umm, around 60? Destroying a planet is hefty; my DM's old group had two spells, one called hammer strike that made the core of the world ring (created earthquakes all over the place for a month afterwards, but required the sacrifice of 1.5 million XP in magic items and 850 levels of spellcasters (all 10th+ level); the other was called earthwrack - it welded all the continental plates and recracked them. The second spell was cast only once, and then only partially; even then it very nearly wiped out all life on the planet, and eradicated winter for the next 500 years. I'm not sure what levels those were in 1E, though.




I am sure all the pieces will fall into place when I eventually work it all out. 



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> I'd have to agree with S'mon - spells that create/destroy matter on a galactic scale should be huge... at least 70th (IOW, only accessible by a number of extremely high-level beings - likely gods - getting together in a ritual to cast them).




Given that I have galactic level shenanigans 'pencilled in' as 90th-level spells, I don't understand your concern that it needs to be at least 70th.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey S'mon! 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> >>What is so significant about '100th-level'? Why do you 'need' it and more to the point why do you need it to be so feeble?<<
> 
> You seem to have overlooked that:
> 
> 1.  In my conversion Greater Gods start at 40th & Doomstar is 96th, so 100th is very high
> 
> but
> 
> 2. In your standard conversion Doomstar would be ca 348th level, Thrin is over 80th (+ a divine CR mod presumably), and apparently lots of critters are 100+




CR 100+ deities or monsters are not necessarily planet destroyers.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> So letting 100th levellers destroy planets will have far more impact in your 'official' rules than in my game.




Absolutely. Then again, you like your deities to be relatively weak. In fact, I have noticed that your deities roughly parallel my avatars/aspects, so those rules may be more to your taste.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> >>When initially created Doomstar was, in terms of power:
> 
> Overgod > Doomstar > Greater God (Correct!?)<<
> 
> He was much higher level than any Overgod - Doomstar 500th, Overgods ca 100th in their highest class.  He had less hit points though, being single-classed M_U - ca 540 hp as opposed to 1000 for an Overgod.  I'd say he was more powerful than an Overgod on neutral terrain but would not wish to face Ahriman on his home plane.
> 
> He's 96th level by my conversion.  I suspect Overgods are lower than that, probably 60-80.  Plus CR divinity mods of course.




So your overgods are not really the planet creating, reality shaping entities from mythology that you previously mentioned were one of the primary factors in creation myths, but instead operate on a less than city-wide strata of power...if even that?



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> I think arguing about _my_ campaign is slightly pointless, since I am free to ignore your work if it doesn't suit me.




True.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> You should think about how having 100th-levellers destroy planets affects your own power gradient, where AIR Greater Gods are around 100th level?




Well remember you would have to be single classed and min/maxed to even be powerful enough.

In the Bestiary, the Arch-Deva (Greater God) can cast 21st-level spells. While a Seraphim (an Overgod/Old One) can cast 33rd-level spells. Of course I don't introduce this new more powerful facet of epic magic in the Bestiary. So a 33rd-level spell isn't going to be stasising any countries using the official rules. 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Can Boccob destroy a planet?




If not he could certainly make a mess of one. Then again, Boccob would likely be the most powerful non-cosmic arcane spellcaster. Personally I'd say he would be casting about 40th-level spells. The maximum spell level would probably be equal to half your caster level.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> >>It should be noted that although Thrin was 117th-level in 1e, he would be nowhere near that figure had we applied the 3rd Edition methods for advancement and you know it. You even converted him to about 44th, which I think is probably a fair appraisal of where he would actually be. <<
> 
> I was more interested in appraising actual relative power rather than advancement, but you're probably right.




I think we are spot on with 44th-level, given what you are doing with the other gods.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> OK, I'll look at increasing the cost of a Nat Armour Bonus, maybe it should be similar to a Deflection bonus given that they both cost the same in magic items cost.  Actually the obvious sensible thing to do would be to not make the DC linear, but to use the same formula as for magic items. I'm thinking 10 +  (Bonus squared x 4)  for natural armour  - so +4 would be base DC 74.  Sound about right?  For regular Armour bonus I'd use 10 + (Bonus squared x2) since item Armour bonuses are half as expensive as natural armour, and also IMC Nat armour is harder to come by.




Certainly sounds better.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Edit:  My copy of Fortify doesn't mention it being able to improve AC.




Quote:

Spells using the fortify seed grant a +1 enhancement bonus to whichever one of the following you choose:
- Any one ability score
- Any one kind of saving throw
- Spell resistance
- Natural armour

etc.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hello again! 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> >>- 20th-level spell = Teleport City
> - 30th-level Spell = Stasise Country
> - 40th-level spell = Dead Magic Zone (Planetwide)
> - 50th level spell = Destroy Planet
> - 60th level spell = Create Sun
> - 70th-level spell = Summon Black Hole
> - 90th-level spell = Move Galaxy <<
> 
> The first 3 are arbitrary in that their difficulty mostly depends on how magic works.  Plane shifting a city might be much easier than teleporting it to a designated location, for instance.  And creating a planetary dead magic zone might be far easier than stasising a country - after all Temp Stasis is 9th level, 1 target, where A-M shell is 6th and affects an area.




Well you are making the assumption that Dead Magic = Anti-Magic.

Other than that, obviously a planet wide application of a 6th-level area effect spell is going to be lower level than a planet wide application of an 8th-level single target spell (Temporal Stasis is 8th-level by the way).



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> The other effects aren't really comparable to me, they seem on a different scale with each increment being ca 100 billion times more powerful than the one before, except summoning a black hole is only about 13 times as difficult as creating a sun-sized star.  So I think your scale is kinda wonky.




...I did say it was off the top of my head, and for what its worth, generalised. Otherwise I might have said Create Sun (62nd-level), Summon Black Hole (67th-level). But I don't really want to get down to specifics at this point.

Be of no doubt the final eventual system will be flawless.  



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> If I were you using your level gradient I'd maybe put plane-shifting a city-sized area at 20th, a global dead magic zone at 40th (depending on duration), scouring a planet with windstorms 50th, a global stasis zone at 60th,




I don't 'put' effects at a given level, theres nothing arbitrary about this (although I suppose on the basis of my spell list you might well have come to that assumption).



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> vapourising a planet with a word ca 500th, creating a (real-world) sun maybe 5000th, creating a black hole ca 5050,  moving a (real-world) galaxy 50,000.




Thats just utterly pointless though.



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> But you should be considering the physics of the universe - if the sun is a 6' orb drawn across the sky by a chariot, it may be quite easy to create.


----------



## Anabstercorian

16 days, er, more or less.


----------



## Baronovan

Hi there, UK. Me again.



> I don't 'put' effects at a given level, theres nothing arbitrary about this (although I suppose on the basis of my spell list you might well have come to that assumption).




How, may I ask, does anyone "formulate" what level a "summon black hole" spell wouldbe without using some arbitration? You're not the be-all end-all authority on this system; frankly, I don't think there is one, as not even the original writiers are consistent enough to support the idea of any kind of "final mechanic" by which all others are measured and balanced. So you _must_ be approximating something. I just don't buy your claim of not doing so.


----------



## S'mon

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> So your overgods are not really the planet creating, reality shaping entities from mythology that you previously mentioned were one of the primary factors in creation myths, but instead operate on a less than city-wide strata of power...if even that?




In terms of their direct impact on the campaign world, yes.

Odin Vili & Vi helped form the world in Norse myth, but that doesn't mean Odin can just snap his fingers and make a new planet - or even destroy a city.  OK he _could_ destroy a city, but it would take a fair bit of effort - and so could a 20th level Wizard or Druid.


----------



## S'mon

Baronovan said:
			
		

> How, may I ask, does anyone "formulate" what level a "summon black hole" spell wouldbe without using some arbitration? You're not the be-all end-all authority on this system; frankly, I don't think there is one, as not even the original writiers are consistent enough to support the idea of any kind of "final mechanic" by which all others are measured and balanced. So you _must_ be approximating something. I just don't buy your claim of not doing so.




This would be my feeling also.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Baronovan said:
			
		

> Hi there, UK. Me again.




Hiya Baranovan mate! 



			
				Baronovan said:
			
		

> How, may I ask, does anyone "formulate" what level a "summon black hole" spell would be without using some arbitration? You're not the be-all end-all authority on this system; frankly, I don't think there is one, as not even the original writiers are consistent enough to support the idea of any kind of "final mechanic" by which all others are measured and balanced. So you _must_ be approximating something. I just don't buy your claim of not doing so.




Any arbitration is derived wholly from the the spells within the core rules. In fact to be totally honest, EVERY part of this addendum to epic magic (if you will), is derived from the players handbook. All I have done is change one single, solitary sentence or principle of the players handbook and from that everything else falls into place. I could tell you what it is but I hate to ruin surprises.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> The funny thing is he could just as easily make that a +40 Natural Armour bonus for the same GP/XP cost, by increasing the casting time and taking a little backlash damage.
> 
> [...]
> 
> It would be DC 46 using the Armour Spell Seed, DC 154 for a deflection bonus using the armour spell seed and DC 93 using the Fortify Spell Seed. Nice and balanced eh! Can you anticipate which one your wizard wants to use!
> 
> I would Hazard a guess and say the Armour Spell Seed is perhaps broken.




Remember, though, that you can't effectively use backlash on such spells:



			
				SRD said:
			
		

> For spells with durations longer than instantaneous, the backlash damage is per round.


----------



## CRGreathouse

S'mon said:
			
		

> But you should be considering the physics of the universe - if the sun is a 6' orb drawn across the sky by a chariot, it may be quite easy to create.




Actually this does bring up some interesting points. In my campaign here are the sizes of some celestial bodies (very approximate -- off the top of my head):
Sun: 5000-ft radius
Major moon (Selene): 200-ft radius
Minor moon (Qamar): 35-ft radius

How would this affect your system?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey S'mon! 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> In terms of their direct impact on the campaign world, yes.




Well then, just regard my overgods as the real thing and yours as sort of a diet overgod...overgod-lite...that sort of thing. 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Odin Vili & Vi helped form the world in Norse myth, but that doesn't mean Odin can just snap his fingers and make a new planet -




I don't believe I was suggesting such...



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> or even destroy a city. OK he _could_ destroy a city, but it would take a fair bit of effort - and so could a 20th level Wizard or Druid.




...I'd certainly fancy any greater god to at least be able to destroy a city, although how exactly they would destroy it would probably be up to the individual god. Tidal wave, volcanic eruption, violent thunderstorms, earthquake, comet, hurricane, plague, mass suicide compulsion, a zone preventing healing of any kind (nice one for Hel that).

Gods work in mysterious ways after all, so its unlikely Odins just going to pop up over Greyhawk and shout "Eat superlaser mortal scum!".



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> This would be my feeling also.




Oh ye of little faith.


----------



## Anabstercorian

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Gods work in mysterious ways after all, so its unlikely Odins just going to pop up over Greyhawk and shout "Eat superlaser mortal scum!".




But could Doomstar? 

Still 17 days remaining!


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey CRGreathouse matey! 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> Actually this does bring up some interesting points. In my campaign here are the sizes of some celestial bodies (very approximate -- off the top of my head):
> Sun: 5000-ft radius
> Major moon (Selene): 200-ft radius
> Minor moon (Qamar): 35-ft radius
> 
> How would this affect your system?




Well you could destroy those lunar bodies with a couple of disintigrate spells. The main stumbling block being the range. However if you had an epic' disintigrate spell with sufficient range you could easily take them out with a few shots from the planets surface.

Obviously if somethings easier to destroy, then its also easier to create/recreate.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey there! 



			
				Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> But could Doomstar?




Yes. 

He would just hover above the city and cast Ground Zero and the effect would be like the Mothership lasers in the movie Independance Day.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Well you could destroy those lunar bodies with a couple of disintigrate spells. The main stumbling block being the range. However if you had an epic' disintigrate spell with sufficient range you could easily take them out with a few shots from the planets surface.
> 
> Obviously if somethings easier to destroy, then its also easier to create/recreate.




For the sun, that's all there is to say.

For the moons, though, they are actually divine entities of themselves -- intermediate deities, functioning as lesser deities during their slumber.  That would probably make a difference for the purpose of _disintigrating_ them....


----------



## S'mon

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Well then, just regard my overgods as the real thing and yours as sort of a diet overgod...overgod-lite...that sort of thing.




Considering it was me that invented the term I'll regard mine as the 'real thing', cheers.


----------



## Zoatebix

Hey U_K-
Since the Challenge Ratings threads are all long dead, I figured I throw this question over here:

How would you rate a creature ability that gave a luck (or similar easy-to-stack) bonus to all attacks, saves, and checks - like a stone of good luck as a supernatural or extraordinary abilitiy?

I'm thinking that (since a luck/insight/whatever) bonus to attack is worth .125 per plus one, and that bonuses to saving throws would probably be rated similarly, that an "of good luck" creature ability would be between .35 and .5 CR per +1 bonus, depending on how important a bonus to all ability and skill checks is to the mix.
-George


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey CRGreathouse matey! 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> For the sun, that's all there is to say.
> 
> For the moons, though, they are actually divine entities of themselves -- intermediate deities, functioning as lesser deities during their slumber.  That would probably make a difference for the purpose of _disintigrating_ them....




Absolutely!


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey S'mon! 



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> Considering it was me that invented the term I'll regard mine as the 'real thing', cheers.




I thought Coca Cola invented the term 'the real thing'...but I guess you learn something new every day.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Zoatebix said:
			
		

> Hey U_K-




Hi Zoatebix mate! 



			
				Zoatebix said:
			
		

> Since the Challenge Ratings threads are all long dead, I figured I throw this question over here:
> 
> How would you rate a creature ability that gave a luck (or similar easy-to-stack) bonus to all attacks, saves, and checks - like a stone of good luck as a supernatural or extraordinary abilitiy?
> 
> I'm thinking that (since a luck/insight/whatever) bonus to attack is worth .125 per plus one, and that bonuses to saving throws would probably be rated similarly, that an "of good luck" creature ability would be between .35 and .5 CR per +1 bonus, depending on how important a bonus to all ability and skill checks is to the mix.




Spot on.


----------



## Zoatebix

Thanks!

After putting some more though into this, I'm going to refrain from defining a general, 'stone of good luck'-type bonus in terms of a CR factor.  Instead I'll break it into its constituent parts on a per-creature basis.  For "checks" I'll use the "non-level or HD-tied" skill guideline and calculate the total factor as if the creature had a bonus to every skill that's usable untrained _and _every skill listed in its description.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Zoatebix said:
			
		

> How would you rate a creature ability that gave a luck (or similar easy-to-stack) bonus to all attacks, saves, and checks - like a stone of good luck as a supernatural or extraordinary abilitiy?
> 
> I'm thinking that (since a luck/insight/whatever) bonus to attack is worth .125 per plus one, and that bonuses to saving throws would probably be rated similarly, that an "of good luck" creature ability would be between .35 and .5 CR per +1 bonus, depending on how important a bonus to all ability and skill checks is to the mix.




I'd think between .3 and .4, probably between .3 and .35.  Bonuses to ability and skill checks are worth a lot less than to saves and attacks, but they still have value.  Most of the skill bonuses are wasted (since the creature's bonus still won't be high enough to be valuable) but it won't be entirely gone.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey guys! 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> I'd think between .3 and .4, probably between .3 and .35.  Bonuses to ability and skill checks are worth a lot less than to saves and attacks, but they still have value.  Most of the skill bonuses are wasted (since the creature's bonus still won't be high enough to be valuable) but it won't be entirely gone.




Looking at pg. 285 of the DMG (v.3.5) it appears a luck bonus (to AC) is bonus squared x 2500 GP. Compared to Bonus squared x 2000 GP for natural armour. Hence the +25%.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Looking at pg. 285 of the DMG (v.3.5) it appears a luck bonus (to AC) is bonus squared x 2500 GP. Compared to Bonus squared x 2000 GP for natural armour. Hence the +25%.




I'm comparing a luck bonus to attack and saves to a luck bonus to skills and ability checks, not a __ bonus to skill checks to a luck bonus to skill checks.


----------



## Sledge

S'mon I highly doubt you invented the term 'overgod' as it is nothing new in the last 20 years.  I'm sure you could fine references to it going back at least 60 years and potentially centuries.


----------



## Kerrick

> Any arbitration is derived wholly from the the spells within the core rules. In fact to be totally honest, EVERY part of this addendum to epic magic (if you will), is derived from the players handbook. All I have done is change one single, solitary sentence or principle of the players handbook and from that everything else falls into place. I could tell you what it is but I hate to ruin surprises.




I've been pondering this statement the last couple days... See, no offense, but I don't much care about new monsters - I'm not a DM, so I don't use them, and as a game designer, they're not really my forte, so they hold little interest for me. Magic, and specifically spells, is my thing, and thus your projected addendum is of great interest to me. Since you say that everything came from the PHB, it's obviously not based on the ELH system. Once I made that raalization, it almost clicked for me, but not quite - it's like trying to remember a name that's hovering just out of reach of your consciousness. 

I'm curious, though (and hopefully you can answer this question): is your epic spell system merely an extension of the existing one, where you can simply make spells of 10th, 15th, 30th level, or are there some hard and fast rules like you did for CRs? I know with my level-based system, I still have to decide what level the spell will be in the first place before I can tweak everything to fit into place properly (and even then it sometimes doesn't quite happen the way I'd like). I'm really interested to see how your system could handle earthwrack, or some of the other spells that I couldn't recreate.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hiya mate! 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> I'm comparing a luck bonus to attack and saves to a luck bonus to skills and ability checks, not a __ bonus to skill checks to a luck bonus to skill checks.




Well isn't that comparison attack/saves/skills/ability checks already in the CR/EL document?

...maybe you were simply pointing out the differences therein, in which case I have picked up wrong on what you were saying.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hi Kerrick mate! 



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> I've been pondering this statement the last couple days...




Intersting isn't it. 



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> See, no offense, but I don't much care about new monsters - I'm not a DM, so I don't use them, and as a game designer, they're not really my forte, so they hold little interest for me.




Thats okay, can't please all the people all the time...although, c'mon, who doesn't like new monsters. 



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> Magic, and specifically spells, is my thing, and thus your projected addendum is of great interest to me.




Glad I could pique your curiousity.



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> Since you say that everything came from the PHB, it's obviously not based on the ELH system.




Thats a fair appraisal of the bare bones of both my system and this recent change I have hit upon. 

But not necessarily true for dimensional magic, which is another facet of my system. 



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> Once I made that raalization, it almost clicked for me, but not quite - it's like trying to remember a name that's hovering just out of reach of your consciousness.




This recent change is something so obvious, that its hard to see the wood for the trees. 



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> I'm curious, though (and hopefully you can answer this question): is your epic spell system merely an extension of the existing one, where you can simply make spells of 10th, 15th, 30th level, or are there some hard and fast rules like you did for CRs?




Tricky question to answer without blurting everything out. 

I do have a system for determining spell level but I don't think its necessary to know it, to be able to use my spell system. In a similar way that you don't need to know the Challenge Rating system, before you can use the Encounter Level system.

Personally I don't like the epic spell system for a myriad number of reasons, so my spell system is not an extension or conversion of that which is in the ELH, although that said its pretty easy to convert spells over, especially given that few of the epic spells are more than mere extensions or combinations of existing spells.

I just find my approach is simpler to use, ostensibly doesn't require any new rules, it even works at non-epic levels, it puts the 'epic' back into epic gaming, its far easier for character creation (PC or NPC), it doesn't make the lower level spells redundant, its far better balanced.



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> I know with my level-based system, I still have to decide what level the spell will be in the first place before I can tweak everything to fit into place properly (and even then it sometimes doesn't quite happen the way I'd like).




You are always going to face that dilemma if you are introducing some totally new spell property.



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> I'm really interested to see how your system could handle earthwrack, or some of the other spells that I couldn't recreate.




I'm not familiar with Earthwrack, though I admit I am curious as to why converting particular spells is giving you so much trouble? Feel free to post it here or email me the details and I'll see if I can help, although I reserve the right to keep the secrets of my system safe for now.


----------



## Kerrick

> But not necessarily true for dimensional magic, which is another facet of my system.




Dimension magic, huh? I won't even ask, because I know you won't say anything...  



> I'm not familiar with Earthwrack, though I admit I am curious as to why converting particular spells is giving you so much trouble? Feel free to post it here or email me the details and I'll see if I can help, although I reserve the right to keep the secrets of my system safe for now.




Earthwrack was the spell I was talking about earlier, where it welds the continental plates together and recracks them. It's only been cast once in history, and then only partially; even then it changed the climate so radically that winter was banished for 500 years. It's got a ridiculous amount preparation to go into it: 

The caster must make one menhir each week of the year; they must be virgin stone, and no worked tools can have touched any stone within 1 mile of them. Each must be quarried 10 miles apart. They must be carved with runes by blind dwarves with bone chisels, who are buried alive after their work is complete. The caster sacrifices 2,000 creatures with SR, 100 HD each of air, earth, fire, water elementals, 250 HD of fiends, 50 HD of celestials, and cave in the heads of 100 druids at least 5th level; he must sacrifice half his XP (note: this was 1E, so I don't know how it would work now). The ritual takes 30 days to cast. The end result is that everything on the planet takes 100d6, no save. 

Now you see why I'm having trouble converting that?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Kerrick mate! 



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> Dimension magic, huh? I won't even ask, because I know you won't say anything...




Dimensional Magic probably sounds more exotic than it is, but you're right in that I don't necessarily want to discuss it at this juncture. 



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> Earthwrack was the spell I was talking about earlier, where it welds the continental plates together and recracks them. It's only been cast once in history, and then only partially; even then it changed the climate so radically that winter was banished for 500 years. It's got a ridiculous amount preparation to go into it:
> 
> The caster must make one menhir each week of the year; they must be virgin stone, and no worked tools can have touched any stone within 1 mile of them. Each must be quarried 10 miles apart. They must be carved with runes by blind dwarves with bone chisels, who are buried alive after their work is complete. The caster sacrifices 2,000 creatures with SR, 100 HD each of air, earth, fire, water elementals, 250 HD of fiends, 50 HD of celestials, and cave in the heads of 100 druids at least 5th level; he must sacrifice half his XP (note: this was 1E, so I don't know how it would work now). The ritual takes 30 days to cast. The end result is that everything on the planet takes 100d6, no save.
> 
> Now you see why I'm having trouble converting that?




Well it would take about 30 seconds to convert to my system (honest), but I can see why its giving you (and the epic spell system) some gip.

Its not totally clear what type of damage is being dealt. I am assuming 'earthquake' damage, but there may be some volcanic activity as well. 

Incidently I estimate that actually reshaping the planets surface would deal over 900d6 damage to structures and variable damage to creatures depending on whether they were on open ground or inside structures etc. Given the effect is global, the shockwaves would continue for a few rounds, diminishing probably by 50% each subsequent round. The dust thrown up by the seismic activity could potentially blot out the sun for years in addition to causing slow suffocation on all unprotected breathing creatures. Initially temperatures would sharply rise (heat displacement and volcanic activity), then cool drammatically as the heat from the sun is blocked by the dust (severe heat to severe cold probably).

It should be possible to reshape a planet without all the collateral damage, but that would actually be higher level.

I don't exactly want to show you how it converts to my system (as that would give too much away), but suffice to say it would be done very easily indeed. 

Any others that were giving you problems?


----------



## Sledge

So is it done yet?


----------



## Kerrick

> Well it would take about 30 seconds to convert to my system (honest), but I can see why its giving you (and the epic spell system) some gip.




Well actually, I'm using my own system that's based on the epic spell system, but yeah - it can't really be done my way. I'm not really sure about all the details on the spell - what kind of damage it does, its effects, etc. - my DM (the spell came from his old group) told me what it did and what it required. I'm not even sure he knows all of it, since it was only cast the once, but we could easily come up with effects, but since no one could cast it anyway, it'd be a moot point. BTW, what level would it come out to?



> Any others that were giving you problems?




Just one, really - a spell called eternal night, which draws a blanket of darkness across an area up to one mile radius/level. Even shrinking the level down to 1/4 mile/level, it's simply too big to do, but I'm sure it'd be easy for you. We have a few others like create city (which I might be able to do), genies's wish, and hammer strike (I mentioned this one earlier - it makes the core of the world ring like a bell) that I dismissed out of hand as "can't be done". I don't really have details on those, sorry.

I think I figured out your secret. I got up in the middle of the night to take a leak, and thought about it while I was half-asleep, and it hit me. It IS obvious, once you think of it, and very elegant. I'll be very interested to see the whole thing when you decide to reveal it.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Sledge mate! 



			
				Sledge said:
			
		

> So is it done yet?




Very nearly.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Kerrick matey! 



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> Well actually, I'm using my own system that's based on the epic spell system,




I know. 



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> but yeah - it can't really be done my way.




I can explain why you can't convert it, but doing so would sort of mean spilling the beans on my own system.



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> I'm not really sure about all the details on the spell - what kind of damage it does, its effects, etc. - my DM (the spell came from his old group) told me what it did and what it required. I'm not even sure he knows all of it, since it was only cast the once, but we could easily come up with effects,




Exactly. It wouldn't really matter. You could easily convert the spell as written (using my system), however, in my estimation reshaping a planets surface would actually be more damaging as I outlined previously.



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> but since no one could cast it anyway, it'd be a moot point.




Of course, but then thats a trait of the epic spell system itself - its impossible to do anything epic with it.



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> BTW, what level would it come out to?




I presume you mean what level of my system? I suspect a straight conversion of your spell would be in the mid 40's, a conversion of my interpretation probably mid 50's. Of course thats just a guess.



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> Just one, really - a spell called eternal night, which draws a blanket of darkness across an area up to one mile radius/level. Even shrinking the level down to 1/4 mile/level, it's simply too big to do, but I'm sure it'd be easy for you.




Yes, all this stuff is easy peasy with my system (as you may have already worked out), but it does show up the scale limitations of the epic spell system I'm sure you'll agree.



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> We have a few others like create city (which I might be able to do), genies's wish, and hammer strike (I mentioned this one earlier - it makes the core of the world ring like a bell) that I dismissed out of hand as "can't be done". I don't really have details on those, sorry.




Thats okay.



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> I think I figured out your secret. I got up in the middle of the night to take a leak, and thought about it while I was half-asleep, and it hit me. It IS obvious, once you think of it, and very elegant. I'll be very interested to see the whole thing when you decide to reveal it.




Email me what you think it is and I'll tell you if you have it sussed or not. 

...but no blubbing the details afterwards if you please.


----------



## Kerrick

> Of course, but then thats a trait of the epic spell system itself - its impossible to do anything epic with it.




I know... :/ With mine, you can do cool stuff, though the really big, reshape-the-face-of-the-world spells are still a bit out of reach. But that's okay, I guess... how often is someone going to cast one of thsoe anyway?



> I presume you mean what level of my system? I suspect a straight conversion of your spell would be in the mid 40's, a conversion of my interpretation probably mid 50's. Of course thats just a guess.




Sounds about right. The highest level spell we have right now is around 37th (I haven't quite worked out all the details yet) - it raises 200 HD of undead as military commanders, which in turn raise other undead to serve under them, which in turn... you get the idea... all the way down to squad level. In total, it raises something like 10,000 HD of undead, but only the main commanders are under the caster's control - they issue commands to those under them. 



> Email me what you think it is and I'll tell you if you have it sussed or not.
> 
> ...but no blubbing the details afterwards if you please.




I will do that... and don't worry, my lips are sealed.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Kerrick mate! 



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> I know... :/ With mine, you can do cool stuff, though the really big, reshape-the-face-of-the-world spells are still a bit out of reach. But that's okay, I guess... how often is someone going to cast one of thsoe anyway?




Well certainly not with the epic level rules.

...of course, with another set of rules it might not be so improbable. 



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> Sounds about right. The highest level spell we have right now is around 37th (I haven't quite worked out all the details yet) - it raises 200 HD of undead as military commanders, which in turn raise other undead to serve under them, which in turn... you get the idea... all the way down to squad level. In total, it raises something like 10,000 HD of undead, but only the main commanders are under the caster's control - they issue commands to those under them.




 



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> I will do that... and don't worry, my lips are sealed.


----------



## CRGreathouse

Kerrick said:
			
		

> I will do that... and don't worry, my lips are sealed.




U_K -- will you release him from that if his system isn't like yours?


----------



## Fieari

Krust, my players are hitting epic level now (finally) and so all my planning that I've been doing for months is finally going to be needed.  They'll be encountering world reshaping stuff any time now.  I'd really like to use your magic system instead of the standard epic magic system.

Is there any chance you'd be able to sell a not-up-to-your-level-of-standards version of the basic basic basic magic system you have?  Even just the concept would likely be enough to work for my campaign, which needs city spanning spells at the least, and global spanning spells shortly afterwards.  Heck, a txt file outlining the principle is all I'm asking for.  I'd pay good money for it.


----------



## Anabstercorian

13 days.  Use them well.  Publish or perish.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey CRGreathouse mate! 



			
				CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> U_K -- will you release him from that if his system isn't like yours?




Of course...and it wasn't.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Fieari mate! 



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> Krust, my players are hitting epic level now (finally) and so all my planning that I've been doing for months is finally going to be needed.  They'll be encountering world reshaping stuff any time now.  I'd really like to use your magic system instead of the standard epic magic system.




Well you know that it doesn't 'flick a switch' and allow global spells at low epic levels.



			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> Is there any chance you'd be able to sell a not-up-to-your-level-of-standards version of the basic basic basic magic system you have?  Even just the concept would likely be enough to work for my campaign, which needs city spanning spells at the least, and global spanning spells shortly afterwards.  Heck, a txt file outlining the principle is all I'm asking for.  I'd pay good money for it.




At the moment I am very reticent about doing something like this I must admit. I'll have to think about it for a day or two. Though maybe we could treat it as a pre-order for the Grimoire or something like that (although even that idea I am not really happy about).

But again I have to stress, when I said it was so simple I could explain it with a single sentence - I wasn't joking. I can just see people reading it and thinking "Thats so flipping obvious I could have thought of that on my own" and being initially disappointed.


----------



## Nifelhein

Hey UK!

Just being picky, if you can tell it all in a single sentence, why bother the audience with such a long time? Release it first and then the rest, sell the sentence for a dollar or two on rpgnow!


----------



## Kerrick

Well, since I've been released from not saying anything, I can say what my guess was. I thought he was treating spell levels like CRs, where you could make range, damage, targets, etc. as adjustments and add them to the final level. But, it's much simpler than that, so I'll keep wracking my brains to figure it out. 



> At the moment I am very reticent about doing something like this I must admit. I'll have to think about it for a day or two. Though maybe we could treat it as a pre-order for the Grimoire or something like that (although even that idea I am not really happy about).




Don't let the masses sway you into something you don't want to do. If you're not happy with what you have, don't release it. You can't please all the people all the time (sorry Fieari).


----------



## CRGreathouse

Kerrick said:
			
		

> Don't let the masses sway you into something you don't want to do. If you're not happy with what you have, don't release it. You can't please all the people all the time (sorry Fieari).




But, by the same token, you shouldn't hold onto what's ready too long -- and yes, I'm talking about the first half of the Bestiary.


----------



## Anabstercorian

If you don't finish in 13 days, my GOD, the horror you will reap.  Don't make that mistake.


----------



## Sledge

Anabstercorian: 11 days right?


----------



## Anabstercorian

11 days.


----------



## Anabstercorian

10 days.


----------



## Aquarius Alodar

Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> 10 days.




Oh...please.  

But seriously, Krust, a status update on the thing would be quite apprecicated, even if only to spare Anabstercorian his relentless Countdown. (Yes, I know - bad pun.)


----------



## Sledge

*Sledge is holding his breath until IH bestiary is done and delivered*


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey all! 



			
				Aquarius Alodar said:
			
		

> Oh...please.
> 
> But seriously, Krust, a status update on the thing would be quite apprecicated, even if only to spare Anabstercorian his relentless Countdown. (Yes, I know - bad pun.)




Well, when the work came back from the editors (a few weeks ago) I printed it all out and combed over it in great detail and found there were still quite a number of mistakes, many of which, to be fair, were things only I would have spotted. Also, its easier to spot mistakes when you have a hard copy.

On top of that the version the editor had was only 99% complete, which meant a few loose ends needed tying up anyway. Also to keep the double page spread format for over 90% of the monsters I needed to add a new monster.

So this 're-edit' if you will has taken me slightly longer than expected, but it should be done by tomorrow, leaving me with the last handful or so (technically slightly more than a handful) art pieces and the cover to finish off.


----------



## Nifelhein

You mean the whole bestiary, right?


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Nifelhein matey! 



			
				Nifelhein said:
			
		

> You mean the whole bestiary, right?




No, I'm afraid not.

Regarding the Bestiary Preview, I could probably have an early version available (minus art) by Friday, with the final version (with all the art) the following Friday.

Naturally anyone who purchased the early version would get the art version free.

I'm not sure if anyone would be interested in this deal though?

At this point I think the Bestiary Preview will be $6 (at least when I am selling it, that might escalate to $7 (?) when publisher and online store get their meathooks in). I was hoping to initially sell the full Bestiary for $8, but remember, originally the Bestiary was only going to be 96 pages, the Bestiary Preview itself is now 91 pages (technically 88 minus the cover, contents and license agreement).

If I had a killer artist onboard I'd probably sell it for more, but I think $6 is a fair price.


----------



## Verequus

Of course I am interested in such a deal. And I'm sure that the others will be interested, too. Just do it!


----------



## Sledge

If it comes out in preview preview mode on friday then you will have a sale here.

Just a thought might want to call is Bestiary Vol. 1 rather than preview.


----------



## CRGreathouse

I absolutely second Sledge -- release it, and call it Bestiary Volume I.  A 100-page, $6 product isn't exactly a preview.


----------



## Baronovan

Seriously. A true preview would have allowed for some errors and an off-page count. "OCD" mean anything to anyone here?


----------



## Anabstercorian

Technically, if you rename it to Bestiary Vol. 1, I don't think I"ll be in any sort of position to rain down my assault of bitter vindictiveness.  8 days, on that subject...


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey all! 

Yes I was thinking of calling it 'Part One', but I suppose Volume one is probably better.

So it'll be something like:

*Immortals Handbook
Epic Bestiary
Volume One*


----------



## Baronovan

Well, it won't be squat if it never comes out.


----------



## Kerrick

> Regarding the Bestiary Preview, I could probably have an early version available (minus art) by Friday, with the final version (with all the art) the following Friday.
> 
> Naturally anyone who purchased the early version would get the art version free.
> 
> I'm not sure if anyone would be interested in this deal though?




Let me see... I can buy the no-art version now, and get all the stats, AND I get the art version a week later for free...

Or I can wait a week to buy the art version with the stats. 

Hmm... let me think about that one...


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Kerrick mate! 



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> Let me see... I can buy the no-art version now, and get all the stats, AND I get the art version a week later for free...
> 
> Or I can wait a week to buy the art version with the stats.
> 
> Hmm... let me think about that one...




Well, its always easier to visualise monsters when you have an image, so people might not want to spoil what (admittedly little given I'm no Wayne Reynolds) impact that will add.

Also I'm thinking some people may want to print this out as soon as possible (I don't know about the rest of you but I always feel more comfortable reading text off a page rather than a screen), so again they might just wait for the art version.

Lastly, the non-art version won't be available at various online stores, which means you'll need paypal* for it (since thats the only quick way I know of where I can receive the money), so if you have a credit card you'll just have to wait for the art version.

*In fact that reminds me I'll have to check if my paypal account is still functioning, I haven't actually used it yet and I set it up months ago.


----------



## Fieari

Paypal can be done.  Those that have problems with it can always wait a week after all, right?


----------



## Kerrick

> Well, its always easier to visualise monsters when you have an image, so people might not want to spoil what (admittedly little given I'm no Wayne Reynolds) impact that will add.




True... I know a lot of people complained when the MM didn't have a pic for all the monsters.



> Also I'm thinking some people may want to print this out as soon as possible (I don't know about the rest of you but I always feel more comfortable reading text off a page rather than a screen), so again they might just wait for the art version.




Yeah... true again. But me, I'd like to at least get my hands on the thing and look at the monsters, see what's there, and (if I were a DM) start planning how to use them against my players. Art doesn't really figure into that - by the time I run the adventure, I'll have the art version, and I can show them what it looks like. Or not. Art is important, yes, but it's not the end-all of a book.



> Lastly, the non-art version won't be available at various online stores, which means you'll need paypal* for it (since thats the only quick way I know of where I can receive the money), so if you have a credit card you'll just have to wait for the art version.




Like Fieari said, paypal can be done. Most people I know who shop for d20 stuff online have it... I don't have a credit card, myself. But either way, at least it's finally coming out.


----------



## Kavon

Hmm... Well, I'll go for the early one with some pics missing and getting the full one for free some time later 
I've got paypal, but no creditcard, so it's not like I have much choice there anyway


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey guys! 

Okay here is the current situation, the final draft is virtually finished (of course this being me I decided to make some more changes last night). Anyway I hope to have that completed tonight, at which point I'll hand it to the editor for his last quick read through.

Tomorrow I am actually going to an RPG convention in Belfast (called Q-Con). Sunday I will double check everything one last time and get any last feedback from the editor before I turn the document into a pdf and do the bookmarks.

So almost certainly Volume One of the Immortals Handbook *Epic Bestiary* will be available this Monday (27th). I'll post the details of how you can obtain a copy both here and on the website.

Obviously this isn't an automated process at this stage (unless someone can explain how to set up such a process?), its going to be, you pay, I send it to you. So naturally anyone sending the money while I'm asleep (for instance) will have to wait until I get up before they'll receive their copies.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Kavon matey! 



			
				Kavon said:
			
		

> Hmm... Well, I'll go for the early one with some pics missing and getting the full one for free some time later
> I've got paypal, but no creditcard, so it's not like I have much choice there anyway




I can always make either version available to people without credit cards who can't otherwise buy it online (as long as they have paypal).


----------



## Anabstercorian

[MrT]Six days, foo'!  You best hurry![/MrT]


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hiya mate! 



			
				Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> [MrT]Six days, foo'!  You best hurry![/MrT]




[Hannibal Smith]*chomps on cigar* I love it when a plan comes together![/Hannibal Smith]


----------



## Kerrick

I'm surprised you're not offerng it on, like RPGNow... of course, since you don't have a publisher, that might be a bit difficult. If you're looking for one, drop me a line - we might be able to work something out.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Kerrick mate! 



			
				Kerrick said:
			
		

> I'm surprised you're not offering it on, like RPGNow... of course, since you don't have a publisher, that might be a bit difficult. If you're looking for one, drop me a line - we might be able to work something out.




Well I won't be offering the non-art version on RPGNow.


----------



## Alzrius

Hey U_K, this is only tangentially related to the IH, but did you notice my little pet project that just went up over on the Planewalker site? I'm quite proud of it; a listing of every god ever published in a D&D product. Now if only someone would get to work on updating all of these guys.


----------



## Nifelhein

Nice one, I saw it and found it a huge work with nice commitment...


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey guys! 

Very nice work Alzrius matey! 

Okay, basically I got back from Q-Con just over an hour ago, had my dinner so I am am just getting online now (after 10pm).

Originally I had intended to only attend on the Saturday, however I won the Street Fighter 3 competition and was told the prizes (which were far too good to turn down) would be awarded at the end on Sunday. So that meant I had to go Sunday as well. During which I won the Burnout 3 competition too.   

Unfortunately the Krusts 100% record was dented at the Tekken 5 competition, however with *THREE* legitimate excuses: firstly the 'x' button on the PS2 controller for player 1 was wonky (because some doofus playing earlier on freeplay for an hour was a complete button masher) and it only worked part of the time; secondly the tournament was played using team battle rather than versus and the Krust has only learnt a few characters; thirdly the guy who won the competition *OWNS* the arcade machine! 

Nevertheless a half decent showing by yours truly given that I don't actually own an x-box or PS2.

While I was there I also managed to pick up the DMG 2, Monte's Requiem for a God and the Hellsing d20...Alucard is 34th-level in the book in case you were wondering. Haven't done much more than breeze through the books at this point obviously. But I'll probably do a review of Requiem at some point.

Kudos to the LARPers putting on a swordplay exhibition and demonstration. Very interesting, and it felt weird holding the replica 18th-century fencing sword, the blade must have been 4 feet long. Felt very 'unwieldy', the fighting seemed much less about moving the blade itself and far more about your own movement.

I also got chatting to Marc Farrimond of Mongoose Publishing who seems a very decent chap, and I was shown one of their forthcoming releases. Starship Troopers d20. I have to admit I was very impressed with the quality of it. Full colour, glossy pages, good art, they have the bugs (over a dozen different types) and the skinny's detailed (for those who know their Starship Troopers). I only had about 20-30 minutes to breeze through it but it looks glorious it really does. Thats one to look out for in a week or two, it'll be interesting reading the reviews to see if under close scrutiny the content matches my first impressions.

Anyway, I had a great time, though next year I'll prebook and get some more roleplaying done. This weekend I was attending with a non-roleplayer so it was more of an anime/video game centric event for me. But I had a great time, met some cool people and had a lot of fun. 

However, all that fun has a flip side and meant I haven't been able to get anything done on the Bestiary over the weekend, which still needs about 7-8 hours work. So the chances of it being onsale Monday are pretty slim. Tuesday should be okay though. *touch wood*


----------



## Anabstercorian

Don't screw up, or your inevitable fate will be gruesome!   ​


----------



## Fieari

Foo.   I was hoping to be able to reveal it to my group's session tommorow evening.


----------



## CRGreathouse

I look forward to the release!


----------



## Baronovan

Well, something will come up on Sunday and delay it another day or two, then UK will get sick on Tuesday, then Friday will come along and Anabstercorian will blow a gasket and UK will delay the text in his honor... this thing is never coming out. It's been three years already, people, c'mon.


----------



## Impeesa

Meanwhile, some fans reading the website discuss the book's status...

--Impeesa--


----------



## Baronovan

Basically.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey guys! 

...can one of the regular posters here (who has paypal and has used it before) email me, I need to test something out.

Thanks.

The book will be available sometime tomorrow (definately), even if I don't have everything 100.00% to my liking. I can always make any necessary changes (more like nitpicks, you know me by now - I'm never satisfied) for the art version.


----------



## Alzrius

BOOYEAH!!! Finally! Finally we get our first real taste of the IH!


----------



## Yair

Alzrius said:
			
		

> BOOYEAH!!! Finally! Finally we get our first real taste of the IH!



MMM ? We get a taste of epic monsters, not the Worship Point System or anything on *Immortals*, so color me unimpressed. I've been waiting for a good treatment of D&D deities and high level play for ever, but this won't be it. Not even a taste of it.


----------



## Baronovan

I cannot second Yair more. I really can't. Kudos for the high-end monster write ups. Show me some Apotheosis.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey there Yair! 



			
				Yair said:
			
		

> MMM ? We get a taste of epic monsters, not the Worship Point System or anything on *Immortals*, so color me unimpressed. I've been waiting for a good treatment of D&D deities and high level play for ever, but this won't be it. Not even a taste of it.




Well there is more to the Bestiary than merely epic monsters, and it does give a small taste of divinity. But after tonight you can talk to other people who have it and gauge whether or not its worth purchasing or not.

If most people want to see the Immortals Rules before Volume II of the Bestiary (obviously the art version of Volume I will still happen first) then I am happy to comply. I'll probably set up a poll here tomorrow about it...bit busy tonight though. 

The situation is that I should finish off the Bestiary at about 11:00pm (my time) and spend the following hour turing it into a pdf (the bookmarks taking up the time). So it will be available at about midnight my time (GMT)...I won't go to bed until about 2am to make sure the early adopters all get their copies as soon as possible.

I'll post the details here (and on the website) of how you can grab a copy, by the way the price will be £3.50 (or at least I would prefer it in pounds sterling), which by todays exchange rate is about $6.30. If this is a problem (?), remember Volume I of the Bestiary (with the art) will be available at places like rpgnow hopefully with a week or so anyway.


----------



## Anabstercorian

Don't screw up!   You've got just 34 hours to prevent 

*ULTIMATE FAILURE AT LIFE.*


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Anabstercorian matey! 



			
				Anabstercorian said:
			
		

> Don't screw up!   You've got just 34 hours to prevent
> 
> *ULTIMATE FAILURE AT LIFE.*




Personally I would rather release it tomorrow than tonight, if its released tonight, there will likely be a handful of things missing. But I did say I would make it available today - which I will do, but only to the people who email me for the specific purpose of seeing it tonight, I won't 'go public' until tomorrow, there are simply too many things that need finished.

So if you simply can't get through the night without seeing it, email me. If you can wait 24 hours (or less), just hold on until tomorrow.


----------



## Nifelhein

Hey UK!

I think I will wait for the full fledged version on this one, although i am a physical book lvoer over pdf anytime. Anyway, I was wondering, isn't this thread already long enough in pages? Maybe start a new one with the definition of how one can get a week ahead without art would be nice. 

Do not forget to talk about what it is and what is yet to come when you make the announcement (the public one or the speedy one), that will help those who do not follow the whole threads know what is up.

Cheers,

Nif.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Nifelhein said:
			
		

> Hey UK!




Hiya mate! 



			
				Nifelhein said:
			
		

> I think I will wait for the full fledged version on this one, although i am a physical book lvoer over pdf anytime.




Me too. On that respect I may have an announcement on all things print related very soon. Don't tell no one though. 



			
				Nifelhein said:
			
		

> Anyway, I was wondering, isn't this thread already long enough in pages? Maybe start a new one with the definition of how one can get a week ahead without art would be nice.




Sure thing, I'll start a new thread sometime tomorrow night, with a poll asking which product people most want to see next.



			
				Nifelhein said:
			
		

> Do not forget to talk about what it is and what is yet to come when you make the announcement (the public one or the speedy one), that will help those who do not follow the whole threads know what is up.




Thanks for the support mate.


----------



## Fieari

...I guess I can wait until tommorow.  I need it definitely by Saturday, but I can wait one more day.


----------



## Nifelhein

Hey UK!

No problem, I really want to see this all to go to ENWorld's front page at last, first as a releasement announcement, then we get to see new at enworld rpg store, then we see reviews and last, but no least, we see a web enhancement. 

Keep up the good work, and do not worry, my game has 5th level characters yet.


----------



## Alzrius

Hm, I was going to be sure to get it tomorrow, but if it's only going to be a week or so to get it at RPGnow, I may wait for the art version.

Just to be safe though, U_K, I know you've said it before, but would you mind reiterating that anyone who buys the version up tomorrow will be able to get, for free, the version with art at RPGnow later?

Also, does the Bestiary still have monsters with CRs into the tens of thousands? I can't remember if you'd decided to scale that back or not (I hope not).


----------



## thundershot

*perks* Print? Did I hear UK say print?





Chris


----------



## Anabstercorian

I wanted to take this time to make one thing clear:

I think that Upper Krust has a great passion for this task he's undertaken.  Now, this passion has led to a degree of perfectionism which has hurt his ability to publish his product - but it leads me to have great faith in the eventual quality of that product.  Good luck, UK.  I look forward to your product.

But I WILL drop the most vicious blows in history to your ego if it's necessary to keep you from becoming so passionate about your product that you never finish improving it.  For petes sake, man, you could have issued like ten editions by now!  You could have published and sold it EACH TIME you changed it!  You could have made so much money!  Honestly, you're almost as bad as the www.e-sheep.com guy - the best artist who ever stank at his job.


----------



## Cheiromancer

So has *anyone* taken UK up on his offer of the art-free version of the Bestiary?

I would just like to hear confirmation that it actually exists.


----------



## Anabstercorian

Hmm, I should probably do that.  I'd like the Art-Free Bestiary, please!


----------



## Sledge

I'm waiting for UK to wake up in the morning and e-mail it to me.  Darn UK time.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey Alzrius mate! 



			
				Alzrius said:
			
		

> Hm, I was going to be sure to get it tomorrow, but if it's only going to be a week or so to get it at RPGnow, I may wait for the art version.
> 
> Just to be safe though, U_K, I know you've said it before, but would you mind reiterating that anyone who buys the version up tomorrow will be able to get, for free, the version with art at RPGnow later?




Thats correct, although I will be sending those people the art version (not rpgnow, just to clarify).



			
				Alzrius said:
			
		

> Also, does the Bestiary still have monsters with CRs into the tens of thousands? I can't remember if you'd decided to scale that back or not (I hope not).




I did scale things back when I realised how powerful something of even CR 1000 would be.

I have most of the CRs listed on the website:

http://www.immortalshandbook.com/immortalshandbook.htm

Most of the monsters are under CR 100, since thats what most people will use, there are quite a few monsters with multiple CRs such as the dragons, elementals and golems (some of which go above CR 1000 if I remember correctly...Orichalcum Leviathan). Also I have a handful of very powerful monsters in and around the CR 200 mark. There is one monster in Bestiary Volume I with a CR of over 1000 (Neutronium Golem).

When people see the monsters they can let me know if they want to see more powerful or less powerful epic monsters in future products. I think I have a pretty good spread though.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hiya mate! 



			
				Cheiromancer said:
			
		

> So has *anyone* taken UK up on his offer of the art-free version of the Bestiary?
> 
> I would just like to hear confirmation that it actually exists.




A few people emailed me about it in the middle of the night, but obviously I was in bed.

Sledge was the only one who emailed me before I went to bed and when I replied with the details I didn't receive payment until 4:40 am (which I am only finding out about this morning). I emailed Sledge earlier asking if he wanted to wait or not until this evening, I mean if hes on the west coast its going to be his morning by the time I have the thing finished anyway - unless hes getting up in the middle of the night.

Of course staying up to 2am meant I bloody slept in this morning, but that shouldn't be a problem.


----------



## Fieari

I just sent in my order (although not payment yet, since I need to know how much and where to).  I'll post again when I actually get it in order to assuage all you doubters out there.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Just stopped by for a moment, I should be finished in about 3 hours time, then I can make the pdf and add the bookmarks. I'll post the details when I have the pdf ready to roll.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey guys! 

Okay, its finished (the pdf is just over 500 KB), although there are no bookmarks, I started doing them and then realised it will take about another 5 or 6 hours to do all the entries and the tables. Not to mention that I would have to redo them all again when I came to set up the art version.  

So you will just have to do without them for now.

I'll send a copy to anyone who Paypals £3.50 to

agooddesigner@hotmail.com

Remember this is the text only version. But anyone who buys it now will get the art version free when its finished in a week or so.

...oh and those people who have already paid, I'll send it to you in a moment.

One last thing, this is not an automated service, so if you don't get your copy immediately be patient, I could be away from the computer temporarily, or I could be in bed if its the middle of the night here.

Anyway thanks for your patience, be sure and let me know what you think. There are some parts of the text that I will be tweaking before the official release (when I add the art) but this should be fairly close to the final draft.


----------



## Upper_Krust

Hey all! 

Okay I started a new thread here:

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=138184

with a poll.

So when the moderators get a chance feel free to lock this one down.


----------

