4th Edition and the Immortals Handbook

[Alzrius]

That assumes it will all be my art - which it probably won't.

Fair enough, but that just means negotiating with the artists so that you can have their art appear in two books, rather than one. I wouldn't think it'd be that much more difficult/expensive, since one book is really just a mechanical conversion of the other.

Not totally familiar with that. But best of luck to Bad Axe Games.

I'm surprised that you're not more familiar with it. They refer to you by name in the Trailblazer GM Day Preview.

Not dropping Godsend at all, no, but maybe redefining a few of its parameters. For instance, dante has been clamouring for the inclusion of the Nosferatu in that book. But with the 4E Nosferatu in the very first Gods & Monsters pdf it might be better to use them in the 3.5 conversion of that book - rather than Godsend itself.

Good to hear that the book will still be coming out, though I worry that it just dropped down several places as far was what your next few releases will be.

I'll be taking names. Might need a few people to cover all the books...although who am I kidding...at my pace!

Between your conversion table and v.6 of your CR system, there's a fairly stable framework for converting creatures. The only areas that'll really require some guesswork will be giving the monsters skills, feats, and spell-like abilities. This last one will be particularly tricky, since it'll be hard to determine how many they should have, and what they should be. Any guidelines you used in that regard (beyond what's in v.6) would be helpful.

I suppose. However, definately the Bestiary coming out so long after the pdf really dented its sales and I can see the same happening with Ascension.

All the more reason to do it sooner rather than later.

I was initially going to make the transition adventure something like Kobold Hall in the 4E DMG. By that I mean in terms of the number of encounters (five). However if I was going to sell this 'prologue' on its own merits I think I'd need 8 encounters. I think that will make it substantial enough to warrant a painted cover and a handful of new monster stat blocks and illustrations.

Well, it's always a viable alternative that, if it's shorter than you like, you could simply sell it for a reduced price. The idea, as I pitched it above, is to make it lure people towards your system.

My current idea for this adventure is entitled L0* - "No Chance In Hell" and involves the Chinese Deity of Trickery/Thievery & Fire, No Cha. I had one freaky idea whereby you would actually fight No Cha in every encounter (changing his guises) amidst a gauntlet of traps although that might be tricky to pull off successfully.

*Legendary Zero

I wonder if you could call him Sung Chiang instead - that's the name they used for this deity in earlier editions of D&D (particularly in 2E Planescape).

No Cha would also appear in the (eventual) Immortals Index - Chinese Mythology book. Each Immortals Index volume features 12 main entries, six protagonists and six antagonists, as well as noting some possible PCs/Heroes. Each of the 12 main entries is usually comprised of a small number of characters usually the primary deity, some linked secondary deity, an avatar or exarch and probably an aspect or creature. I'm thinking each Immortals Index will also contain a generic temple layout (I'll steal that idea from D&Dg) as well as a handful of generic worshippers and cultists (probably epic tier).

The temple idea doesn't appeal to me much; I remember that being a fairly generic layout that I always thought I could have done myself. It really struck me as a space-waster.

The beauty of 4E is that creating monsters is easy - in fact I often have to hold back on the monster creation. The major problem is that more monsters means more required artwork - personally I think a monster (especially a new monster) needs art to bring it to life. Even if it means one of my 'journeyman' efforts.

I agree with you about monsters needing art. I just wonder if, at least for that "introductory" adventure, it'd be better to limit your ambition rather than let that become a sticking point.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hiya mate!

Fair enough, but that just means negotiating with the artists so that you can have their art appear in two books, rather than one. I wouldn't think it'd be that much more difficult/expensive, since one book is really just a mechanical conversion of the other.

Indeed.

I'm surprised that you're not more familiar with it. They refer to you by name in the Trailblazer GM Day Preview.

I'll have to sign in and download it - write-up looks interesting, its a free download too.

Good to hear that the book will still be coming out, though I worry that it just dropped down several places as far was what your next few releases will be.

Probably, yes, but in fairness it was such a hard slog as it is, it was just going to hold everything else back. By breaking Godsend up into seperate components I can get them done sooner. The major problem with Godsend were the deity stat blocks - they were incredibly annoying to do. I will also probably add the Design an Epic Monster Competition winners into Gods & Monsters - although I'll probably do the 4E versions of them myself.

Between your conversion table and v.6 of your CR system, there's a fairly stable framework for converting creatures. The only areas that'll really require some guesswork will be giving the monsters skills, feats, and spell-like abilities. This last one will be particularly tricky, since it'll be hard to determine how many they should have, and what they should be. Any guidelines you used in that regard (beyond what's in v.6) would be helpful.

I thought I specifically mentioned how many spell-like abilities to have in the Design Parameters section of the CR/EL pdf.

All the more reason to do it sooner rather than later.

We'll see. I still need to finish the art on that book myself.

Well, it's always a viable alternative that, if it's shorter than you like, you could simply sell it for a reduced price. The idea, as I pitched it above, is to make it lure people towards your system.

The price will be based upon a combination of page count and art content.

I wonder if you could call him Sung Chiang instead - that's the name they used for this deity in earlier editions of D&D (particularly in 2E Planescape).

Did I mention I dislike 2E more than 3E!?

Also the title "No Chance in Hell" loses something of its hidden meaning when I change his name to Sung Chiang.

The temple idea doesn't appeal to me much; I remember that being a fairly generic layout that I always thought I could have done myself. It really struck me as a space-waster.

I was thinking that maybe it could be set up like an Elder Evils style encounter. So that the temple would serve as the backdrop for such an encounter.

I agree with you about monsters needing art. I just wonder if, at least for that "introductory" adventure, it'd be better to limit your ambition rather than let that become a sticking point.

My ambition does usually get the better of me its true. But at the same time I don't like doing things by half.

Also I am wary of the idea of simply using Monster Manual monsters in the adventure. Primarily because there are very few relevant monsters at that level. But also because it always seems to me less exotic when adventures feature generic monsters.

 

[Alzrius]

Probably, yes, but in fairness it was such a hard slog as it is, it was just going to hold everything else back. By breaking Godsend up into seperate components I can get them done sooner. The major problem with Godsend were the deity stat blocks - they were incredibly annoying to do. I will also probably add the Design an Epic Monster Competition winners into Gods & Monsters - although I'll probably do the 4E versions of them myself.

I remember how tough it was to design a divine stat block back when I did stats for Death. I can imagine how hard it'd be to do several, especially for ones of a higher divine stature. Still, that said, I can't wait to see Tetragrammaton.

I thought I specifically mentioned how many spell-like abilities to have in the Design Parameters section of the CR/EL pdf.

That section lists the maximum number of spell-like abilities a creature should have (no more than its Hit Dice) and breaks down the number of the highest levels of them, but that's pretty much it. Though realistically, that's probably as much as can be done in a generalization.

Also the title "No Chance in Hell" loses something of its hidden meaning when I change his name to Sung Chiang.

Hm, good point, I hadn't even seen that. Though at that point the full name of the adventure sounds like "No Cha's in Hell."

I was thinking that maybe it could be set up like an Elder Evils style encounter. So that the temple would serve as the backdrop for such an encounter.

That could work better; certainly more than just having a temple thrown in there and saying "this is what a generic temple looks like."

Also I am wary of the idea of simply using Monster Manual monsters in the adventure. Primarily because there are very few relevant monsters at that level. But also because it always seems to me less exotic when adventures feature generic monsters.

I can understand the latter reason, but I assume 4E has some range of advancing monsters; surely you can do that and then come up with a colorful backstory for how they became so?

 

[Kerrick]

Oh, please, Lord, say it's so!

Also, U_K, this is a little off topic, but are your current books not availible for purchase at the moment? I have someone over at the WotC epic 3.5 board who's interested but all the links from your site say they don't carry them anymore.

There's still an epic board? I thought it had gone away after they changed over to "Gleemax". I used to frequent the old epic forums, but I'm not sure I'd want to with the new system anyway - I could never log in.

 

[paradox42]

Either way, I'll throw my hat in the ring for attempting to convert your 4E works to 3.5.

As will I.

And as a potential added bonus, I do have two games currently using IH rules, so I could use new rules to playtest and see how they work in actual game situations (plus, you know I have some serious powergamers in my group, so we can probably find the breaking points quickly as well). Even though we're also using a lot of house rules, so many it isn't even really 3.5 anymore but rather something closely based on it, we can still provide playtesting value along the lines of finding breaking points. It was my players, after all, who found the Anyfeat/infinite spell-knowledge loophole.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey Alzrius dude!

I remember how tough it was to design a divine stat block back when I did stats for Death. I can imagine how hard it'd be to do several, especially for ones of a higher divine stature.

Tell me about it!

...then throw in a severe dislike of the system and the pull of the other system that you really want to be working on. Plus the fact that I have forgotten most of what was once second nature (as regards 3E).

Still, that said, I can't wait to see Tetragrammaton.

*Hurumph*

That section lists the maximum number of spell-like abilities a creature should have (no more than its Hit Dice) and breaks down the number of the highest levels of them, but that's pretty much it. Though realistically, that's probably as much as can be done in a generalization.

I thought I had added in that at best you were only meant to have 18 SLA total (In effect representing the two portfolios levels 1-9). Although that wouldn't necessarily count added SLA from divinity templates.

Hm, good point, I hadn't even seen that. Though at that point the full name of the adventure sounds like "No Cha's in Hell."

That could work better; certainly more than just having a temple thrown in there and saying "this is what a generic temple looks like."

Something simple like the three encounter 'min-adventures'. Been doing some research into Egyptian Priesthoods and found some really interesting stuff that I think I can use to make a Temple encounter pretty interesting for even Quasi-deities.

I'll also have some really nice epic tier Ophidians *cough* Yuan-ti *cough* as the bulk of Set's forces.

I can understand the latter reason, but I assume 4E has some range of advancing monsters;

Well you can just advance them (at which point they sort of become new monsters) or you can add templates (which are sort of a lateral shift in power).

But the main problem is that there just are not that many monsters in the monster manual that are relevant (as far as I can tell) to this adventure. I think I can see four at best here and only two of those would work as written.

surely you can do that and then come up with a colorful backstory for how they became so?

I might be able to rustle something up.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey there!

There's still an epic board? I thought it had gone away after they changed over to "Gleemax". I used to frequent the old epic forums, but I'm not sure I'd want to with the new system anyway - I could never log in.

Epic Classes - Wizards Community

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey paradox matey!

As will I.

Noted.

At this point I am working out the numerical breakdown of the pdf percentages. I'll probably give 30% of the 'writing'* profits to whomever is doing the conversion to 3.5E (or more depending upon the extent of the work involved). So if that was both you and Alzrius we could just divide the 30% of the writing profits by page count between who does what.

Does that sound fair to both of you?

*As opposed to 'Art' profits. Although the 'writing' also encompasses the design and layout and so forth otherwise I'd split it 50/50.

And as a potential added bonus, I do have two games currently using IH rules, so I could use new rules to playtest and see how they work in actual game situations (plus, you know I have some serious powergamers in my group, so we can probably find the breaking points quickly as well). Even though we're also using a lot of house rules, so many it isn't even really 3.5 anymore but rather something closely based on it, we can still provide playtesting value along the lines of finding breaking points. It was my players, after all, who found the Anyfeat/infinite spell-knowledge loophole.

Cool. I am happy to trust both Alzrius and yourself with conversion duties.

 

[paradox42]

Sounds perfectly fair to me.

 

[Fieari]

Here's a tangent for you.

In some studies recently, I came across the term Rephaim, which could be:

A) A race of giants
B) A synonym for Nephilim
C) A type of ghost residing in the land of the dead

Now, individually, none of those definitions are anything particularly interesting as far as the handbook goes, but if you put them together, you get a Giant Undead Half-Angel. And that sounds cool to me.

You even have an exemplar, in the form of "Og", an antediluvian Rephite who, according to Jewish folklore, clung to the outside of Noah's ark for the entire duration and thus survived. Later on, he's supposed to be the "fugitive" who informs Abraham that Lot has been taken by an enemy army, and is made nigh-immortal/invincible (beyond his normal status as a Rephite) as a reward... and yet because he was motivated by the desire to have Abraham killed in the war, he was also cursed to fall to one of Abraham's descendants thousands of years later.

That's a campaign hook if I ever saw one.