I am become Pun-Pun, destroyer of multiverses
- Thread starter riprock
- Start date
Henry
Autoexreginated
Barak said:
Now, there's an interesting plot... A god of Entropy wants to end everything so as to fulfill his greatest wish. So he empowers a lowly kobold servant to build itself up to titanic power levels to challenge the very gods. The gods get wind of this, and send their greatest champions (the PCs) into overdrive to stop the emergence of a being who would challenge the gods.
"Seven days, my children," Zeus says. "He will have enough power to destroy us all in 21 days. However, past seven days, he will not be able to be stopped by mortal hands. You only have 7 days..."
Quasqueton
First Post
Define this “perfectly legal” concept. Core D&D3 is the PHB, DMG, and MM. Everything else is supplemental, optional, dependent upon the DM’s permission. And for Players, anything outside the PHB is dependent upon the DM’s permission. Pun-pun is about 1% core legal.
The “extra material” is completely optional. Completely and absolutely optional.
You shouldn’t judge D&D3 by its supplemental materials any more than you should judge AD&D1 (or 2) by its supplemental materials. (And there was a *lot* of supplemental materials for both AD&Ds.
Psionics, in the PHB. Wish spell. Ability score generation methods II-IV. The bard “prestige” class. Artifacts on the random treasure tables. Treasure in published adventure modules. Etc.
Judging any game, or any edition of any game, based on the ability of determined twinks with plenty of time and resources to find ways to twist the rules (including any and all optional rules) into absurdity is a foolish mistake. No game can survive such concentrated manipulation.
And the list of AD&D loopholes were continued for years. And people 10-20 years ago bemoaned this fact just like people bemoan such with D&D3 now.
Quasqueton
So apparently the Pun Pun description describes a power that's available to a monster that allows them to permanently boost some creatures ability scores? Without a cost? Seems to me that this ability was never meant to be in the hands of players and relies on the DMs control of the ability to keep it from running amok in the campaign world. A particularly generous monster would advance the strength scores of every commoner on the planet to his own? This could happen while a deva went around and cured everyone's diseases, and then an efreeti could give them a wish as a parting gift. I don't think DnD was meant to be a simulation.
wayne62682
First Post
Right.. IIRC it relies on the Sarrukh's ability.. the loop begins as he uses it on his viper familiar.. I think its something like this:
1) Pun-Pun enlarges the viper, increasing its strength
2) Uses weird power to get the increased STR himself
3) Reduces familiar down (but it keeps the strength score?)
4) Repeat Step 1. When STR is as high as you need, repeat for other ability scores
Again, I'm not really sure of the mechanics of it.. I know it involves (or used to involve) the viper familiar; it was a critical part of him being able to do it.
1) Pun-Pun enlarges the viper, increasing its strength
2) Uses weird power to get the increased STR himself
3) Reduces familiar down (but it keeps the strength score?)
4) Repeat Step 1. When STR is as high as you need, repeat for other ability scores
Again, I'm not really sure of the mechanics of it.. I know it involves (or used to involve) the viper familiar; it was a critical part of him being able to do it.
Whizbang Dustyboots
Gnometown Hero
It wasn't hard to become a god in AD&D. People did it all the time -- Deities and Demigods was a monster manual to many groups back then.
Why would anyone think that DM judgement in the 1E era would somehow be less fallible than it is now?
Why would anyone think that DM judgement in the 1E era would somehow be less fallible than it is now?
(Psi)SeveredHead
Adventurer
riprock said:
Really, no 3.5 DM would allow Pun-pun. It says so in the thread. 3.x DMs might not want to alter rules, but they can feel free to say "no". (Mind you, some threads on this board involve prolonged rants at DMs who dare to say no.)
There's a funny thread at the WotC board where something similarly silly happened; a rogue (I think 12th level or so) married a 40th-level mage who works as a maid. It's a DMing problem.
DMs who can't say no end up with crazy archers who can make 17 attacks every 2 rounds (without Haste) using some broken kit, or thri-kreen psychics who can attack 12 times per round (with the 2e psionic version of Haste that had no aging penalty - I abused this one), or PCs who can control a Deck of Many Things to the extent that they only draw good cards (I chose not to abuse this one, but other players did), or PC Chosen of Mystra (I foolishly allowed this one once, and of course didn't understand their powers), or what not. (And no, most of these happened in different campaigns.) All that happened under 2e rules. The DM either learns to say no, quits DMing, or runs into Pun-pun like problems. You could break 2e using just the core rules too, and you can say the same thing about 3e.
I agree on the balance problems with the books - I don't really think it's worse than 2e, if only because 3e doesn't yet have as many books (using no math here, just a guess). The more books you allow into your campaign, the more balance problems. There's so many books WotC can't possibly playtest every aspect of every book with each other, and there's holes in the playtesting process too, which I know about having been a playtester.
Last edited:
