Anubis vs. Upper_Krust (Referee: S'mon)

[Anubis]

Also, if this were a real encounter, the PCs would have thought "Oh look, a lone half-orc!" and Incisor would've thought "Oh look, some more puny adventurers to smush!" - ie the actions taken would surely have been different without metagame knowledge. The adventurers would surely have entered melee quicker, and Incisor would've been reluctant to use up his valuable one-shots.

Good point.

My impression from the fight is that the quasi-deity resistances and immunities given are AT LEAST +15 ECL for my campaign - I don't have true striking weapons or energy substitution, Incisor as statted would be invulnerable to pretty much any 11th level PCs IMC. +10 ECL certainly seems too low. The extreme difficulty of hurting him seems more relevant than his relative lack of non-item attack options, and his extreme stats mack even mundane attacks from him noteworthy.

This is certainly a point to ponder. When some campaigns use one set of rules while another uses only core rules and nothing more, the results will indeed be different. In my campaign I'm running, a Quasi-deity who does have ECL 16 total (after everything, +10 for Divine Rank 0) is on a team with a Saiyan and two other Level 16 characters, and they all seem quite balanced. (On a different subject, this party has shown me that a Balor is NOT CR 18 AT ALL, because they rolled over one with ease. Two hits and a single Horrid Wilting took the thing out no problem.)

EDIT: BTW You could try facing 15th-level Incisor ECL 30 off (CR 25?) against a CR 25 party (eg 4 20th levellers is CR 24) and see if the result is different. I think using a 1st level quasi-deity is bound to cause problems like the over-reliance on stats. Also I think maybe 100' is a more plausible encounter distance, in retrospect.

Both of these are also quite valid points that I've already figured out, which is why I was only playing for fun, because the test was moot.

Perhaps the final resolution should be a three-point solution:

1) If you run a campaign based on ONLY the core rules, treat Divine Rank 0 as ECL +14.
2) If you run a campaign using all normal rules, treat it as ECL +10.
3) If you run a campaign using drastically different rule sets (i.e. Forgotten Realms), treat it as ECL +8.

Indeed, the rules you use can make a difference. Using only the core rules, there would be absolutely no way to beat Incisor at Level 11.

 

[Anubis]

Since you're trying to get a balanced ECL for player use, why not run 4 16th level quasi deities against 4 30th level mortals (sort of like Simon suggested). This would be two supposedly equal parties squaring off, and should give you a much better idea than the 4-on-1 (as well as giving the deities a much more rounded selection of abilities, not to mention hp ). Just a thought.

--Impeesa--

That would have been a much better test.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Anubis mate!

Hehehe, funny you should mention the halberd. I already told S'mon that what was REALLY going on with the halberd was that Xun Huo was still holding it, pretending the rest it against the wall, prepared to use it on you. I just figured that the halberd was a moot point by now because after the second time she went to the Wall of Force to try to use the halberd on you, you didn't bite at the bait, and she didn't use it anymore. It was never just left there.

To be honest, it slipped my mind after the last ten rounds because it was a moot point. If you wanna go with that line of reasoning, however, since Xun Huo knew the halberd was there (it was right in front of her), and she knew it was resting against the Wall of Force, on Round 23 in which she did nothing, she would kick the halberd to the ground.

Yes but it did slip your mind. A bit like the potion switcharoo a while back.

I would (as a player) have done that had I thought you would try to use something I was using as a ready action against me 20 rounds later. My characters, however, would not have done that.

...well considering Incisor has been waiting that same time for the Wall of Force to be dropped...

Either which way, Gregory was ready to charge you IMMEDIATELY upon dropping the Wall of Force, and since he knew it was coming, he would have been able to act before Incisor, who would have no such knowledge.

Besides, you didn't ready a move action, which makes it a moot point.

Incisor had been readying to move for ages. Its purely semantics that are defeating me here.

It doesn't make any sense for Incisor to melee. I readied the greataxe (by which I meant I was holding it rather than readying an attack) to lull you into thinking I would melee so as to expediate my escape.

Gregory would go before you because he was ready for it. There is no way Incisor would be even remotely able to react first, considering he had ZERO knowledge of what was going on. You're into metagame thinking again.

Not at all.

If you stand 11ft. away from me round a corner (so I don't know when you start to move) and run at me. As soon as you round the corner (which I am watching) I can move. There is going to be simply no way you would catch me before I could react.

Now apply this to a character with a 44 Dexterity and a move rate increment of 70ft. I just don't see it happening.

Any which way you try to spin it, Gregory should be able to get at least ONE attack on Incisor, which is all he needs.

Like I said earlier, as I see it there should be an initiative roll here (perhaps with your team getting a bonus). Obviously Incisor knows when something is about to happen and hes ready to act.

Additionally I can't see you catching Incisor flatfooted in the AMField yet still gaining all your own bonuses.

Not to mention deactivating the Wall of Force from inside an Anti-Magic Field.

However its not really important anymore.

But I think the test has reinforced my opinions if nothing else.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Anubis mate!

The problem with the judging is that regardless of what ECL a Quasi-deity really is, he created the character as ECL +14 with the wealth of ECL +14.

Which you knew I was going to do before hand and secondly I already proved with 11th-level NPC equipment I still would have been in the exact same position - a point you acknowledged as FACT!

I barely won,

Thats your opinion!

but mainly because he had the equipment of a Level 15 character

Sophistry.

and a min-maxed smackdown at that.

I don't think the character was particularly min-maxed to be honest. He took advantage of his strengths simple as that - is there any character that doesn't.

Had UK created a character that more closely resembled an actual character that would be played,

A player characters you mean...

and gone with the wealth of ECL +10,

...do I then get player character wealth too?

it would have been an easy enough win.

I don't share your assumptions.

So you see, THAT is why the test is invalid. He created a character at ECL +14, so it played like one. Had he made it as ECL +10, it would have played like that instead.

But I proposed the ECL +14 in the first place - you refuted that; hence this challenge.

Basically, the equipment made all the difference.

Not to any great extent it didn't. A point I proved and you agreed with!?!? Are you going to make me quote you?

That and the ruling about the Necklace of Fireballs, which I feel is what made the entire challenge after a certain point.

A ruling which I showed was irrelevant (since all I needed do was detonate one globe and voluntarily fail my save to detonate the entire necklace - another point which you completely agreed with!

Once I figured all this out, I was only playing for fun.

I thought it was light-hearted from the beginning. No point playing to lose though.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Impeesa mate!

Since you're trying to get a balanced ECL for player use, why not run 4 16th level quasi deities against 4 30th level mortals (sort of like Simon suggested). This would be two supposedly equal parties squaring off, and should give you a much better idea than the 4-on-1 (as well as giving the deities a much more rounded selection of abilities, not to mention hp ). Just a thought.

I was thinking, what about I take 1 20th-level NPC (straight out of the DMG and add the quasi-deity template) and Anubis takes x4 30th-level NPCs (straight out of the ELH)?

 

[Impeesa]

Then you're putting a little too much faith in the mechanics of what's an appropriate challenge in a 4-on-1. Two equal (equivalent) level parties with PC gear should be a perfectly 50-50 fight. Just my two bits worth.

--Impeesa--

 

[Anubis]

Yes but it did slip your mind. A bit like the potion switcharoo a while back.

That happens when hours take place between turns. I, as a player, can't be expected to remember everything my characters know.

Besides, you didn't ready a move action, which makes it a moot point.

Except I had readied a partial charge. (Changed from delay once you explained that what you did was not actually a ready action. That made all the difference in my tactics. I took your words literally, not figuratively, and thought you were readying an attack action.)

Incisor had been readying to move for ages. Its purely semantics that are defeating me here.

Rules are not semantic, though. The difference in wording and initiative and our actions was very important.

It doesn't make any sense for Incisor to melee.

No, makes no sense at all for a Half-Orc Barbarian to want to enter melee.

I readied the greataxe (by which I meant I was holding it rather than readying an attack) to lull you into thinking I would melee so as to expediate my escape.

When you say "ready" I interpret as "ready" as per the core rules. If not, you should have said "brandished" or "holding" instead of "readied".

Not at all.

If you stand 11ft. away from me round a corner (so I don't know when you start to move) and run at me. As soon as you round the corner (which I am watching) I can move. There is going to be simply no way you would catch me before I could react.

Now apply this to a character with a 44 Dexterity and a move rate increment of 70ft. I just don't see it happening.

We can't apply reality to the game. You should know better!

Like I said earlier, as I see it there should be an initiative roll here (perhaps with your team getting a bonus). Obviously Incisor knows when something is about to happen and hes ready to act.

I was merely going by the stated rules, to make it simple. We can't make a test to test ECL as it pertains to the core rules if we do not use the core rules in conjunction with the test.

Additionally I can't see you catching Incisor flatfooted in the AMField yet still gaining all your own bonuses.

I never said you were flat-footed. Your AC was reduced to 33 because you Gloves of Dexterity, Bracers of Armor, and Amulet of Natural Armor were turned off in the Antimagic Field.

Fact is, by the definition of Antimagic Field, it was indeed possible. Incisor was within the Antimagic Field while Gregory and the Large Earth Elemental were not. I'm just going by the rules here.

Not to mention deactivating the Wall of Force from inside an Anti-Magic Field.

That is not even implied in the rules. The PH says that a spell can be dismissed as a standard action, and says nothing about it being an actual spell. If you can find anywhere in the books where a rule states that you are unable to dismiss spells from within an Antimagic Field, then I will concede. No such rule exists.

 

[Anubis]

I don't think the character was particularly min-maxed to be honest. He took advantage of his strengths simple as that - is there any character that doesn't.

A Half-Orc Barbarian putting a majority of his stats in Dexterity is taking advantage of his Strengths? Maybe a Halfling Rogue . . .

A ruling which I showed was irrelevant (since all I needed do was detonate one globe and voluntarily fail my save to detonate the entire necklace - another point which you completely agreed with!

I read the description of the Necklace of Fireballs again, however, and found out that they get their own save. In other words, the automatic detonation would not have been something that could be counted on. This is something I found out only yesterday. They get their own save at +7, and you can't willingly fail a save for your equipment. It's in the book. That means the ruling IS what made the difference.

Like I said, I only found this out yesterday after the fact.

 

[Anubis]

I was thinking, what about I take 1 20th-level NPC (straight out of the DMG and add the quasi-deity template) and Anubis takes x4 30th-level NPCs (straight out of the ELH)?

To be honest, that would most likely be the absolute best solution to figure it out. Since I claim that Quasi-deity is ECL +10, then I should defeat such a character using 25% of my resources. And to decide the value of equipment for the character, simply take the character out of the DMG, but take the wealth from the equivilant character in the ELH. (In other words, if you pick the DMG Level 20 Fighter, take the ELH's *Level 30 Fighter's equipment*.) In this way, there is no metagame thinking from either of us, as we get the equipment we're given.

OR, if you would still like to judge it on a factual CR basis (meaning NPC vs. 4 PCs), you could take a Level 5 character from the DMG, give it the equipment of the Level 15 variation (with Quasi-deity powers added, of course), and put the character against four characters I pull out of "Enemies & Allies" from the Iconic characters. Can't get more "standard" than four Iconics against an NPC from the DMG! Honestly, this would work slightly better if only because my spells would be assigned to me, and thus I would not be picking specific spells.

In either scenario, I would advocate assigning divine bonuses to ability scores based on +10 to each instead of +60 total assigned however you please. (Honestly, at first, that's how I thought it was supposed to be done anyway, and you threw me off when you decided the other way. I would seriously advocate the +10 per score over +60 distributed as the official method.)

Either of these would work, although the second case may be more accurate for CR reasoning. Heck, I would be more than willing to play another test fight in that case.

 

[-Eä-]

And:

You should not post your actions here, but to a DM who describes what you see!

This is crucial to the testing. Agree on an arena, and then get a DM. In my opinion Simon handled this well untill he could not spend the time... Simon would be an excellent referee in my opinion.