Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="S'mon" data-source="post: 381457" data-attributes="member: 463">Just skimmed the thread (no rulings from me - I've spent the past week marking Internet Law exam papers, still have 1/3 to do, *sigh*).  Anubis is right that we have different GM styles - I tend to apply 'real world logic' first, 'spirit of the rules' second, & 'letter of the rules' third, a different priority list gives very different outcomes.  And U_K is much more used to my DMing style, giving him an advantage.  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.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.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.</blockquote>

Verification