Another Immortals Handbook thread

[Pssthpok]

Full marks to people for finding such a loophole in the official rules, but you have to get up a bit earlier to pull the wool over my eyes. Hulking Hurler indeed.

But isn't the Hulking Hurler only not as big a deal once you get done changing the rules? Without your UBD table, the mechanics are sound and canon and the HH is as bad as it seems. I'd ask how much damage he would pump out with a similar build but with using your tables, but it seems like people don't want you distracted from finishing the Immortal rules. Have fun!

 

[CR2000]

C'mon Pssthpok, if you're gonna be so negative, do it in another thread.

APOTHEOSIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Pssthpok mate!

But isn't the Hulking Hurler only not as big a deal once you get done changing the rules?

I don't see myself as changing the rules as much as fixing a broken rule. Its a mistake waiting for errata to happen.

If someone can categorically prove that a rule is broken, then you can't justify that rule simply because its been published - thats an appeal to authority as far as I am concerned.

Without your UBD table, the mechanics are sound and canon and the HH is as bad as it seems.

The mechanics may be canon but they are certainly not sound. They follow the letter of the law, but laws which are easily dismissed as nonsense.

I'd ask how much damage he would pump out with a similar build but with using your tables,

Well, lets see, off the top of my head; strength 62 Large size Humanoid. Crushing Damage from throwing what is effectively a Gargantuan object (based on its mass) would be 4d8+39.

I think they make a mistake on the HH thread at the start by multiplying his encumberance x3 (Large Quadruped) instead of x2 (Large), unless of course that is a feature of one of the prestige classes that I am not aware of (?).

Increasing the objects size from Gargantuan to Colossal (requiring something like strength 64) would mean damage was 8d6+39 instead.

but it seems like people don't want you distracted from finishing the Immortal rules.

Well I am sure they mean well, although a few posts here and there do not interupt my flow.

Have fun!

You have to understand that I don't change things simply for my own sake, or the sake of sticking two fingers up at the official rules. I change things because instigating the change is logical and will improve the game to some extent...and I'm just as critical with my own ideas, as my recent changes to my density rules attest.

 

[Zoatebix]

Hey UK,
I'm under the impression that you've given some thought to the "material science" presented in the core d20 rules. Have you deconstructed a scheme of how to derive hardnesses and hit points from real-world information? Does this scheme change based on the physical factor of the campaign, or is only damage that changes? Is any of this information that you're even remotely ready to reveal?

I'm trying to establish a more realistic physical factor baseline for my sci-fantasy game.

I may be spreading that game too thin, trying to have it be everything to everybody, but I haven't given up on it just yet. See, in addition to my 'simulationst' desire for realism, I've got the various character thingies defined in very 'gamist' effects-based terms, and I've thrown some 'narativist' systems (based on FATE's Aspects and Fate points, Grim Tales' Action Points, and True20's Conviction) into the mix as well. I put those theforge terms in quotes, because I think the distinctions can get pretty fuzzy (especially when you look at cool stuff like The Riddle of Steel, FATE, and Capes). Basically, I want my game system to reward people whether they "game the system," (such as they can) play a really interesting character, make a great story, or understand how things work in the real world.

Whew - tangent!

So any advice (or comprehensive lists of materials or design parameters ) that you have would be great.

On a related note, have you checked out David Pulver's d20 Mecha or Military Vehicles? He designed GURPS Vehicles, and he did a really good job making a comprehensive effects-based vehicle system in d20 Mecha. There's even an SRD of it on Guardians or Order's website so you can check out the vehicle creations rules for free, though without any completed vehicles for context, IIRC.

Good luck with all your IH projects!
-George

 

[Fieari]

Can I highly reccomend Ken Hood's "Grim-n-Gritty Revised" system? I let my group try it for a session, and they now won't play anything else. They love how it gets rid of some of the abstraction of combat, and actually remains reasonably cohesive with the system as a whole. I mean, it's advertised as something that will make your game incredibly deadly and all, but really my experience has shown it to be incredibly balanced in almost all ways. The only thing it doesn't really translate well from the normal system is the difference between a d4 HD and a d12 HD, but it tends to work out anyway with all the other peripherals.

Basically, it makes it so that damage is DAMAGE, and dodging is DODGING. So HP isn't an abstraction of dodging and luck and rolling with the blows anymore. If you want some more simulation, you should REALLY give it a shot.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey UK,

Hi Zoatebix mate!

I'm under the impression that you've given some thought to the "material science" presented in the core d20 rules.

Probably too much thought.

Have you deconstructed a scheme of how to derive hardnesses and hit points from real-world information?

Yes, although it uses iron as a basis.

Does this scheme change based on the physical factor of the campaign, or is only damage that changes?

Hardness would change, although iron would stay the same naturally.

Is any of this information that you're even remotely ready to reveal?

Well I could but I would rather save it for the Chronicle section, which has all the stuff on using gods within different settings (ie. Modern, Sci-fi, Superhero etc.). Also it would take a lot of time to type up, so thats not on the cards herein.

I'm trying to establish a more realistic physical factor baseline for my sci-fantasy game.

Well you can having a sliding scale with differing physical factors but personally I prefer to just have two, comic book (which includes both D&D and D20 Modern) and realistic.

One of the aspects of the VSCs is that it makes this kind of thing fairly easy to implement.

A high physical factor coupled with a modern setting will really stick it to the PCs.

I may be spreading that game too thin, trying to have it be everything to everybody, but I haven't given up on it just yet. See, in addition to my 'simulationst' desire for realism, I've got the various character thingies defined in very 'gamist' effects-based terms, and I've thrown some 'narativist' systems (based on FATE's Aspects and Fate points, Grim Tales' Action Points, and True20's Conviction) into the mix as well. I put those theforge terms in quotes, because I think the distinctions can get pretty fuzzy (especially when you look at cool stuff like The Riddle of Steel, FATE, and Capes). Basically, I want my game system to reward people whether they "game the system," (such as they can) play a really interesting character, make a great story, or understand how things work in the real world.

Whew - tangent!

So any advice (or comprehensive lists of materials or design parameters ) that you have would be great.

Well in a high physical factor setting I suggest you double the hardness of (same mass) materials for every tech level.

On a related note, have you checked out David Pulver's d20 Mecha or Military Vehicles? He designed GURPS Vehicles, and he did a really good job making a comprehensive effects-based vehicle system in d20 Mecha. There's even an SRD of it on Guardians or Order's website so you can check out the vehicle creations rules for free, though without any completed vehicles for context, IIRC.

What is his nuke damage - out of curiousity? If indeed he tackles nukes? If not what damage does he ascribe to something like an M1A1 Abrams Main Battle Tank?

Good luck with all your IH projects!
-George

Thanks George!

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey Fieari matey!

Can I highly reccomend Ken Hood's "Grim-n-Gritty Revised" system? I let my group try it for a session, and they now won't play anything else. They love how it gets rid of some of the abstraction of combat, and actually remains reasonably cohesive with the system as a whole. I mean, it's advertised as something that will make your game incredibly deadly and all, but really my experience has shown it to be incredibly balanced in almost all ways. The only thing it doesn't really translate well from the normal system is the difference between a d4 HD and a d12 HD, but it tends to work out anyway with all the other peripherals.

Basically, it makes it so that damage is DAMAGE, and dodging is DODGING. So HP isn't an abstraction of dodging and luck and rolling with the blows anymore. If you want some more simulation, you should REALLY give it a shot.

Sounds interesting. Although I would be curious as to how much it 'revises' the current system?

Its an idea I would hope WotC will adopt in future incarnations of D&D. Although noting that WotC have hired Mike Mearls who seems to have something like this in his Iron Heroes book, it seems like this may happen.

 

[historian]

Hey U_K!

I've got a few questions for you if you have time to answer.

First, I'm wondering at the rate at which damage scales upwards in the "comic book" genre. For instance, if I were seeking to convert the kiloton spell to an exaton, what multiplier would I use (e.g. every eight-fold increase in damage is represented by a doubling of the damage dice).

Second, do you envision tweaking the existing rules for dispelling magic. Even under the epic spell version the dispeller's caster level is limited to 20th, while the dispellee's caster level is unlimited. This seems to have bizarre implications in higher powered campaigns.

Third, antimagic has peculiar implications at higher levels as well. As an example, what would happen to a Cherubim's (Su) abilities if it entered the antimagic field of an Orichalcum Colossus?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Fieari]

Sounds interesting. Although I would be curious as to how much it 'revises' the current system?

Its an idea I would hope WotC will adopt in future incarnations of D&D. Although noting that WotC have hired Mike Mearls who seems to have something like this in his Iron Heroes book, it seems like this may happen.

The GnGr system gives everyone, from the lowliest insect to the mightiest deity, exactly fifteen hitpoints (I've seen some people who like to double it to 30, but the effect is the same, everyone has the same HP) which directly references how injured you are. Every so many points of damage, you start taking negatives to all your rolls (like gaining negative levels). You still have the 10 negative HP before you die.

Then, AC is removed entirely, and replaced with DEFENCE and SOAK. Defense is basically all the "Dodging" style aspects of your AC, like dex bonus, size bonus (or penalty), deflection, shield bonus, and also adds in either your REF save or your BAB, whichever is higher. I suppose it's possible to have a negative defense, but I've never encountered a monster that had one.

Soak is basically all the "absorb hits" aspects of AC, armor bonuses, nat armor, a SIZE BONUS (which outstrips the size penalty to defense, giving an advantage to larger things) and also your constitution bonus is thrown in there. It's possible to have a negative soak, giving anything hitting you a bonus to damage.

Your defense basically acts as AC, and Soak acts as Damage Reduction (which also stacks with DR, of course). One additional factor that makes combat a little more deadly than usual, is that both the attacker and defender roll on each attack. Attack as normal, defender rolls d20 and adds the defense score. For each point higher the attacker rolls than the defender, add one to the damage. So if the defender gets a total of 36, and the attacker gets a total of 48, the attacker adds 12 to damage. Furthermore, if you roll ten or more higher, that's a critical threat (a threat range of 19-20 requires an 8 or higher, 18-20 a 6 or higher, 17-20 a 4 or higher, 16-20 2 or higher, and 15-20 threatens a crit on evey successful hit) and critical hits (if confirmed) can do things like "Bypass Natural Armor" or "Blind Target".

There are a bunch of other little changes that have to take place to the game to make this work, like whenever something refers to a direct HP value (such as the paladin's Lay on Hands ability) divide that value by 3, magic missiles are assumed to auto-crit on every hit, and a couple of other little things, but mostly the rules are these:

1) Fifteen HP for everyone + penalties for damage
2) AC replaced by Defense, which is an opposed roll
3) AC (and part of the old HP) also replaced by Soak, which acts as DR.

With a little practise, I found myself able to use any monster from any source more or less instantly, calculating the def and soak within seconds by glancing at the AC and con value for the critter.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey U_K!

Hi historian mate!

I've got a few questions for you if you have time to answer.

Of course.

First, I'm wondering at the rate at which damage scales upwards in the "comic book" genre. For instance, if I were seeking to convert the kiloton spell to an exaton, what multiplier would I use (e.g. every eight-fold increase in damage is represented by a doubling of the damage dice).

Off the top of my head I think its something like x1.5 damage dice for each eightfold energy increase.

Second, do you envision tweaking the existing rules for dispelling magic. Even under the epic spell version the dispeller's caster level is limited to 20th, while the dispellee's caster level is unlimited. This seems to have bizarre implications in higher powered campaigns.

Yes, I don't like double standards.

Third, antimagic has peculiar implications at higher levels as well. As an example, what would happen to a Cherubim's (Su) abilities if it entered the antimagic field of an Orichalcum Colossus?

Anti-magic has been niggling me for quite some time. Originally I would have said it affected immortals completely and in part thats still my preference. I mean if anti-magic is not powerful enough to subdue an immortals magic, then chances are some deity will come up with an upgrade (dead magic?) that will.

However this is one I'm going to leave up to individual DMs. All the abilities in the IH are noted as either EX or SU (usually the former have internal effects, the latter external effects), so you have the choice to apply this or not. My suggestion is that deities are affected by anti-magic, as are artifacts (although the artifact, like a construct, still retains its inherant power, so you can't just put the Sword of Kas in an antimagic field and break it - its still technically invulnerable).

I present some ways of circumnavigating it, such as the Numinous ability which allows you to create a field of anti-magic through which your own magic will function (for some reason this always reminds me of star trek, wherein you can shoot through your own shields because you have the right 'modulation'). There is also a metamagic feat that lets you cast spells through anti-magic, and like I mentioned above I'll have a dead magic field spell for those who simply want a more powerful option.

As to your example, given that both have anti-magic fields that do not impede their own abilities, I would say they both lose all supernatural powers, although as a sidereal, you could argue the Cherubim was immune to spells under 10th-level and as such only its abilities work (although for me, anti-magic was always the absence of magic, as opposed to magic, although maybe that makes little sense).

Thanks in advance.

My pleasure.