• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

4th Edition and the Immortals Handbook

Center-of-All

First Post
Okay, well am I to assume you are now at least neutral on the other points I explained?

Which bit of my comment do you disagrree with, that immortals should be more versatile? Or that the farther into immortality you go the less relevance your mortal career should have?

Well, yes, more or less. And it's both parts that I have a strong disagreement with. Immortals should certainly be more powerful, but an increased versatility further contributes to the fungibility between characters, a situation that (in my experience) has never lead to anything other than a decrease in character differentation (not elimination, just a decrease).

The relevance of mortality is probably just a taste thing, but I prefer not to have characters 'abandon' such an important part of their lives. Sidelined, perhaps, but not eliminated.



Personally I am thinking that deities should always have solo stats with the following caveats:

1) Those stats may sometimes include servants (for instance Odin's stats would include Sliepnir, Freke, Gere, Huginn and Muninn).

2) Certain deities may have secondary stats at elite or standard levels for use in poignant groups - such as Brahma, Shiva and Vishnu for instance.

I'll pipe in and say that I perfered your earlier idea of them as elites with minions, but the solo thing is probably best for keeping in line with future published products from WotC. I do think, though, that any given deity could be given multiple stat blocks. For example, Orcus as a master of the undead, with him creating and enhancing powerful undead monsters, would use different stats than Orcus as the blighter, bringing ruin and death to those around him. One would be a leader, while the other would probably be a skirmisher or artillery.

Oh, and have you considered non-ascention methods of increasing power? I was just thinking that demilich might make a good epic destiny, and your further extensions of that line could concievably be put out as alternatives to godhood. Ideas?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Hello again! :)

Center-of-All said:
Well, yes, more or less. And it's both parts that I have a strong disagreement with. Immortals should certainly be more powerful, but an increased versatility further contributes to the fungibility between characters, a situation that (in my experience) has never lead to anything other than a decrease in character differentation (not elimination, just a decrease).

Well let me address this point. Firstly, this is a versatility that the game has always had up to now and its a versatility that the game still has in 4E - it still has multi-classing, simply that the mechanics are far tighter. Secondly, its not something thats going to be forced. Characters will still be more powerful specialising in their roles. Obviously the person with four "Controller" based encounter and daily powers will be a superior controller to someone with a mere one (thats even before we count things like feats and ability scores that also play a big part in shaping a characters role).

The relevance of mortality is probably just a taste thing, but I prefer not to have characters 'abandon' such an important part of their lives. Sidelined, perhaps, but not eliminated.

Well then you may want to peruse 4th Editions ruleset a little longer because thats basically how the game works between levels 1-30. For instance, once you get your four encounter powers, the next encounter power replaces the first one you got. By the time you are 30th-level you will have an almost completely different attacking power set than at 15th-level. You don't have any of those old powers (or almost none). Just like how magic items change as you level up and you won't have the same items at 30th as you did at 15th.

My idea operates no differently from that.

I'll pipe in and say that I perfered your earlier idea of them as elites with minions,

I've toyed with this and at one point I was thinking that the monstrous immortals would be solo while the humanoid immortals would be elites. But I am sort of thinking that if you were designing an encounter around battling a deity, you still want them to be the focus.

Remember also that solo monster scan still operate in tandem with other creatures (thats not even counting the possibility of summoned monsters built into their stat blocks - as with the Pit Fiends), you use the total EXP to plan encounters, not simply level and power role. So if Odin was a Level 40 solo encounter, you could always plan that 'final battle' at Level 41 or 42 and include additional forces.

but the solo thing is probably best for keeping in line with future published products from WotC.

Lower levels promote more interaction, so it makes sense from that perspective. It also makes sense from the perspective of workload (for me).

I do think, though, that any given deity could be given multiple stat blocks.

Well I think certainly two power roles (but not combat roles) is likely, though probably with the solo as default.

For example, Orcus as a master of the undead, with him creating and enhancing powerful undead monsters, would use different stats than Orcus as the blighter, bringing ruin and death to those around him. One would be a leader, while the other would probably be a skirmisher or artillery.

I don't like this idea (and given your above comments about versatility I find them surprising). Orcus is Orcus, hes not Orcus the Controller one minute and Orcus the Skirmisher the next. Hes an individual, not a race unto himself trying to fulfill multiple combat roles. If we want a demon prince Brute we can have Demogorgon, if we want a Demon Prince Soldier we can have Graz'zt, a Demon Prince Skirmisher...Pazuzu.

Same with the gods.

Oh, and have you considered non-ascention methods of increasing power? I was just thinking that demilich might make a good epic destiny, and your further extensions of that line could concievably be put out as alternatives to godhood. Ideas?

Absolutely. I definately see undead as one (or rather four) path you might take. Possession is another and I have a list of others written down somewhere. ;)
 

Center-of-All

First Post
Yes, I saw that in the base 4E rules, and wasn't enamored with it their either. But your idea fits the norm, so I won't press the issue ;)

I don't like this idea (and given your above comments about versatility I find them surprising). Orcus is Orcus, hes not Orcus the Controller one minute and Orcus the Skirmisher the next. Hes an individual, not a race unto himself trying to fulfill multiple combat roles. If we want a demon prince Brute we can have Demogorgon, if we want a Demon Prince Soldier we can have Graz'zt, a Demon Prince Skirmisher...Pazuzu.

Same with the gods.

I see your point with this, but I was specifically referring to NPC statblocks. I don't want to see them all used in the same battle, but I think that some immortals could have multiple combat roles within their concept, and more variety is always a good thing. It wouldn't apply to everyone, but for some I still think the idea has merit. I'm not enamoured enough with it to push it further, though.

Do these 'alternates' that you're sitting on have a planned spot in your proto-4scention, or are they yet another in your seemingly bottomless pit of ideas that never get around to being published? ;)
 

Upper_Krust said:
Hey thanks for that Alzrius! Exalted might be a good word for such a tier of play then, fits nicely. I love it when a plan comes together. ;)

"Exalted" might not be such a good choice of word, considering how "Exalted" is also the name of a particular White Wolf RPG dedicated to letting people play as godlike beings.
 

Alzrius

The EN World kitten
Adslahnit said:
"Exalted" might not be such a good choice of word, considering how "Exalted" is also the name of a particular White Wolf RPG dedicated to letting people play as godlike beings.

I thought of that too, but I don't think it's really worth worrying over. U_K's not naming the supplement line "Exalted" (though he will have to call the line of books something else, since I assume he'll still be selling the "Immortal's Handbook" 3.5 products via RPGNow), he's just using that to describe a tier of play. I don't think it'll really cause any confusion if used in that manner.
 

Fieari

Explorer
Upper Krust, has you seen Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann yet? It's a scifi themed anime that might as well have been an immortals campaign in your universe. Having just finished watching it, the final episode in particularly has me thinking that Primordial level gameplay at the very LEAST should be playable, if not going all the way to Eternal and Supernal.

They become large enough that they are standing on a galaxy, throwing smaller galaxies at each other like razor discs. This reminds me of the image you described as wanting to draw, with a time lord using a galaxy as a shield and wielding a cosmic string.
And I think that 4e's approach of keeping the tactical level of the game meaningful at all levels would make this a very possible tier of play.

I mean,
Gurren Lagann even ends with a plot hook-- they could have continued the series and fought off the Spiral Nemesis now that the Anti-Spirals were taken care of! That sounds like a Timelord sort of campaign...

As a side note, the malthusian/cornucopian debate is more interesting when discussed with giant robots.
 

Ahh, Gurren Lagann. The only anime I ever went out of my way to watch. (And I couldn't wait for subs on the last episode, so I just watched it live) A show so epic that we need new words to describe it's epic-ness.
4E, by getting away from derived values, makes combat between planet+ sized combatants meaningful. (I haven't noted any size modifiers, yet) It also seems that 4E monster design is more about making a monster a deadly foe for Level X, rather then making a deadly monster, and then figuring out that it is level X.

If 4E Ascension can pull off fights between galaxy sized foes without the game devolving into rock-paper-scissors-Omegaeffect, I'll get 2 copies. :)
 

Hi Center-of-All! :)

Center-of-All said:
Yes, I saw that in the base 4E rules, and wasn't enamored with it their either. But your idea fits the norm, so I won't press the issue ;)

I think it actually works well and makes total sense.

Center-of-All said:
I see your point with this, but I was specifically referring to NPC statblocks. I don't want to see them all used in the same battle, but I think that some immortals could have multiple combat roles within their concept, and more variety is always a good thing. It wouldn't apply to everyone, but for some I still think the idea has merit. I'm not enamoured enough with it to push it further, though.

I really don't see this working with individuals at all.

Center-of-All said:
Do these 'alternates' that you're sitting on have a planned spot in your proto-4scention, or are they yet another in your seemingly bottomless pit of ideas that never get around to being published? ;)

Well I'll hope to include as much cool stuff as possible in any future books. At this juncture (as mentioned previously), I don't see any way to include every Portfolio in the (first) book, so that rule might apply to every other facet I include, such as new Epic Destinies. I may have some, but not all the Epic Destinies I have brainstormed in the first book.
 

Hi Alzrius mate! :)

Alzrius said:
I thought of that too, but I don't think it's really worth worrying over. U_K's not naming the supplement line "Exalted" (though he will have to call the line of books something else, since I assume he'll still be selling the "Immortal's Handbook" 3.5 products via RPGNow), he's just using that to describe a tier of play. I don't think it'll really cause any confusion if used in that manner.

While never having played Exalted or even owned or seen any of the books, I am aware of it. But something as trivial as naming a tier I don't see as a challenge to their copyright.

As for the naming of any future books, I won't be dropping the Immortals Handbook, because I don't plan on selling 3.5 material after I launch my 4E stuff. I'll stop the sale of my 3.5 pdfs whenever I launch my 4E material. Immortals Handbook is the brand I have created, it may not be much, but I like it. While technically you can create another brand and keep selling the old line, I don't think there is sufficient difference to make that distinction, so I can definately see problems arising if I try that stunt.

You can't make a 3rd Edition Conan the Barbarian book and then change the 4th Edition name to 4th Ronan the Barbarian and redo all the same material, which is basically what you are suggesting.

I think by the time I launch a 4th Edition book the existing 3rd Edition Immortals Handbook pdfs will have run their sales course.

So the question is what 3rd Edition stuff I want to release between now and when I do something with 4th Edition. That may simply be the Gods portion of Gods & Monsters with elements of Grimoire, the Dimensional Magic rules and so forth as well as anything else I can think to squeeze in.

The first 4th Edition book I do will be called simply the "Immortals Handbook".
 

Hey Fieari mate! :)

By the way, on the subject lines of 'did you see', I watched Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull on Friday Night and must say I was greatly disappointed. Not a bad movie, just not a great one. :(

Fieari said:
Upper Krust, has you seen Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann yet? It's a scifi themed anime that might as well have been an immortals campaign in your universe. Having just finished watching it, the final episode in particularly has me thinking that Primordial level gameplay at the very LEAST should be playable, if not going all the way to Eternal and Supernal.

They become large enough that they are standing on a galaxy, throwing smaller galaxies at each other like razor discs. This reminds me of the image you described as wanting to draw, with a time lord using a galaxy as a shield and wielding a cosmic string.
And I think that 4e's approach of keeping the tactical level of the game meaningful at all levels would make this a very possible tier of play.

I mean,
Gurren Lagann even ends with a plot hook-- they could have continued the series and fought off the Spiral Nemesis now that the Anti-Spirals were taken care of! That sounds like a Timelord sort of campaign...

As a side note, the malthusian/cornucopian debate is more interesting when discussed with giant robots.

I was actually thinking about the cosmic tiers in work last night and during my breaks I made some notes.

I think 4th Edition will work to any level, but I sort of don't see much point going beyond level 60, simply because there won't be any new monsters to fight.

So that would mean play would draw to an end (roughly) at First One status (56-60 - yes I know thats a slight change in First One levels).

I will of course have some rules for play beyond that point, but thats the area I will be concentrating upon (21-60).

In one of the 4th Ed. previews, they discuss the various tiers of play and how each differs with the other in terms of monsters, where you go and what you do. I can make similar proclamations about the following 3 tiers (31-60), but after that I'm struggling to see what monsters you will fight or what you'll be doing differently in terms of gaming experience. So again I don't really see much of a point. I could of course spread elements more thinly over the higher tiers, but what the heck is the point of dragging things out that way. I'd rather create a really interesting tier than a bunch of half-@ssed tiers just so someone can have an 80 next to Level rather than a 60. If I have about 50 supra-cosmic monsters (51st-level+), I don't want to spread them out over 3-4 more tiers. If you do that you merely water-down the play between 51st-60th level.

While I know that won't dissuade some of you from going further (and I should mention I will have threats up to 69th-level or possibly higher), it will probably involve a bit of creature/npc/powers/abilities design on the part of the individual DM to carry campaigns beyond 60th though I'll try and help you out where I can.

As regards Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann, I have only seen the clips on youtube (that mostly get deleted), so I did get to see the ending which was very cool. I certainly think something like that would be possible in 4E at the first one tier.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top