Immortals Handbook (aka The Worship Points System)

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Gez mate!

Yet, none of this is directly related to epic-level play or deity-level play... I think it's the thing the most likely to get removed for getting space in the printed version. :·/

I don't criticize the system, just think it is unrelated to the rest of the work...

Natural Armour and Supernatural Deflection must be differentiated between. This means that Graz'zt (large, 'normal' skinned) won't end up with the same Natural Armour as Demogorgon (huge, scaly skinned). They could both have the same Supernatural Deflection though.

except if you can convince me that, like the CR system, the normal AC rules don't work for high level ;·) !

The AC rules still work but you must differentiate between Natural Armour and Supernatural Deflection, subsequently I therefore have to explain that difference and how it affects Outsiders. (even if you don't plan to use the optional mechanics you must acknowledge that a Succubus natural armour bonus to AC is based on Supernatural Deflection, While a Balor is a combination of Natural Armour and Supernatural Deflection)

This is why the new Armour Rules are optional; while the Challenge Rating Rules are enforced.

 

[Gez]

you must acknowledge that a Succubus natural armour bonus to AC is based on Supernatural Deflection

I may be an annoyous nitpicker, but does "supernatural resilience and resistance of the skin" count really as deflection ? The natural armor of the succubus could also be explained by having the skin magically and instantly harden (an innate contingency-like effect) just before a blow. And it would then work like any natural armor bonus, rather than like a deflection armor bonus... We're told that the succubus has a great natural armor, but not how this armor works. Or it could just be that the succubus has in fact a big scaly skin, glamered by illusion magic or maybe recovered by a soft skin through transmutation magic. After all, she got polymorph self at will.

Hey ! IIRC, it's only the second time I disagree with you (the first was about how to create beings ex nihilo if I'm not mistaken).

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey Gez mate!

I may be an annoyous nitpicker, but does "supernatural resilience and resistance of the skin" count really as deflection ?

Yes. Supernatural 'armour' is Damage Reduction.

I debated and explained all this in depth in the previous thread...which I think was when you were having trouble with the boards mate, so you may have missed it!?

http://www.enworld.org/messageboards/showthread.php?s=&threadid=230

The discussion about Natural Armour and Supernatural Deflection starts at the bottom of page 4.

If you still have any questions after reading that I will be more than happy to answer.

The natural armor of the succubus could also be explained by having the skin magically and instantly harden (an innate contingency-like effect) just before a blow. And it would then work like any natural armor bonus, rather than like a deflection armor bonus... We're told that the succubus has a great natural armor, but not how this armor works.

This is all discussed in the thread, forgive my brevity in not wanting to go over it all again mate.

Suffice to say the Succubus has no visible 'natural armour'; therefore we must assume any bonus to AC is supernatural.

The Balor has both natural armour and supernatural deflection.

Or it could just be that the succubus has in fact a big scaly skin, glamered by illusion magic or maybe recovered by a soft skin through transmutation magic. After all, she got polymorph self at will.

That doesn't make sense. If a Succubus had scaly skin but used illusion to cover her hideous visage it would be mentioned in her entry.

Hey ! IIRC, it's only the second time I disagree with you

I'm always open for discussion.

(the first was about how to create beings ex nihilo if I'm not mistaken).

I can't even remember that far back, though I am sure I still have the emails somewhere!

 

[poilbrun]

Wow, bringing back this thread from the abyss of the forums!

I thought about several questions while preparing the next adventure of my campaign, and I thought I'd ask as I'm getting more and more ready to start playing with the IH and my players are getting nearer and nearer of the time when they'll become divinities... Anyways, let's start!

1. Would a deity be able to siphon energy from magic items and/or artifacts? In fact, I thought about low-level deities trying to increase their power to reach par with the other deities of the setting by chasing powerful items to gain power from them.

2. Can the fact from being a divinity be a pre-requesite for feats? I suppose that it can be for feats related to WPs, but for others feats, can the fact from non being a divinity hamper a character's progression? I can find arguments both in favor of and against such a pre-requesite : a divinity reaches a level of understanding above that of a single mortal thus enabling him to gain feats a mortal wouldn't be able to gain ; however, a VERY high-level mortal would also gain with his power the ability to do things no usual mortal would dream of doing, so he too could be entitled to powerful feats...
Related to this question : have you seen the epic level feat called "True Name" in this forums? Condensed, it means that a level 25 character with at least 3 metamagic feats knows his own true name, giving him an understanding of himself higher than others. The benefits are a +4 BAB and +4 AC. True Name I personally believe (as I said in the thread) that this was too much of a change for a simple feat. However, is it in line with your vision of high-level play? I hope not, and that it won't be in line with WotC vision, as I believe that a +4 increase of one's BAB using a sigle feat is way too much (heck, since you need 3 metamagic skills, it might mean an increase in BAB equal to an 8-level progression!).

3. How are the discussions with the publisher going? I'm still curious to know who it's going to be! Are you still on track to give them the work on the 24th? If so, how much time do you think they'll need to put the work on sale?

Thanks a lot for the answers, and please forgive my impatience. The silence in this thread has also made me a bit nervous, but hopeful (maybe you're writing while you're not posting here!)...

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi poil brun mate!

Wow, bringing back this thread from the abyss of the forums!

Appreciate the love mate!

...though I was about to post here myself!

I thought about several questions while preparing the next adventure of my campaign,

Sure fire away!

and I thought I'd ask as I'm getting more and more ready to start playing with the IH and my players are getting nearer and nearer of the time when they'll become divinities...

Well, I may make an announcement in a day or so that a few of you may not want to hear.

Anyways, let's start!

1. Would a deity be able to siphon energy from magic items and/or artifacts? In fact, I thought about low-level deities trying to increase their power to reach par with the other deities of the setting by chasing powerful items to gain power from them.

Yes this is possible.

2. Can the fact from being a divinity be a pre-requesite for feats?

No.

But there are Divine Powers that are not totally unlike feats that do.

I suppose that it can be for feats related to WPs, but for others feats, can the fact from not being a divinity hamper a character's progression?

I don't think so.

I can find arguments both in favor of and against such a pre-requesite : a divinity reaches a level of understanding above that of a single mortal thus enabling him to gain feats a mortal wouldn't be able to gain ;

This is what Divine Powers are for.

however, a VERY high-level mortal would also gain with his power the ability to do things no usual mortal would dream of doing, so he too could be entitled to powerful feats...

Deities would still need to meet prerequisites to gain feats.

Related to this question : have you seen the epic level feat called "True Name" in this forums? Condensed, it means that a level 25 character with at least 3 metamagic feats knows his own true name, giving him an understanding of himself higher than others. The benefits are a +4 BAB and +4 AC.

I'll check it out. Though it says its not an actual Epic Feat, just something someone made up.

I personally believe (as I said in the thread) that this was too much of a change for a simple feat. However, is it in line with your vision of high-level play? I hope not, and that it won't be in line with WotC vision, as I believe that a +4 increase of one's BAB using a sigle feat is way too much (heck, since you need 3 metamagic skills, it might mean an increase in BAB equal to an 8-level progression!).

My first instincts tell me it is a bit arbitrary, though I do like the 'True Name' idea!

If you want to see an Epic Level character check this out:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/arcana/47

3. How are the discussions with the publisher going? I'm still curious to know who it's going to be! Are you still on track to give them the work on the 24th? If so, how much time do you think they'll need to put the work on sale?

I may have both good and bad news in a day or so that will answer this.

Thanks a lot for the answers, and please forgive my impatience.

No forgiveness needed mate!

The silence in this thread has also made me a bit nervous, but hopeful (maybe you're writing while you're not posting here!)...

I was writing (a lot); responding to numerous emails; and I also got distracted by the Hercules thread in the General Discussion Forum.

Can I also just apologise (again) to my mate Lord Talos for not posting a list of secondary Portfolio aspects. My announcement this week will hopefully clear a few points.

 

[poilbrun]

My first instincts tell me it is a bit arbitrary, though I do like the 'True Name' idea!

I think that the idea is great too, but I was more looking on an opinion to know whether this feat was in line with what you believe a epic level feat can do or was too powerful (or too weak!! )

Well, I may make an announcement in a day or so that a few of you may not want to hear.

I may have both good and bad news in a day or so that will answer this.

Can I also just apologise (again) to my mate Lord Talos for not posting a list of secondary Portfolio aspects. My announcement this week will hopefully clear a few points.

Do not make us wait too long, I'm already very curious!

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi poilbrun mate!

I think that the idea is great too, but I was more looking on an opinion to know whether this feat was in line with what you believe a epic level feat can do or was too powerful (or too weak!!)

Its way too powerful and multi-faceted for a single feat.

Do not make us wait too long, I'm already very curious!

I'll make an announcement tomorrow. I can see it getting a mixed reception...but more tomorrow.

 

[poilbrun]

Its way too powerful and multi-faceted for a single feat.

That's what I thought oo, cool to know that the way I see epic level as you do since that's your work I'll use to play epic level adventures!

I'll make an announcement tomorrow. I can see it getting a mixed reception...but more tomorrow.

I can hardly wait, but now that we are "tomorrow" (looking at the time of your post), I think I'll be able to wait!

 

[Gez]

I'll make an announcement tomorrow. I can see it getting a mixed reception...but more tomorrow.

Is it about what you've emailed me ? (I guess so.)

As I said, it is -- I think -- an expected and normal move. But I do see the possible negative aspect of that decision, unless you go with the fix I have proposed that should solve the only possible problem. I'm wondering what do you think about it ?

(It's hard, and fun, not to put spoilers.)

 

[poilbrun]

(It's hard, and fun, not to put spoilers.)

No, it isn't fun for those who don't know a thing about this!