Immortals Handbook - Ascension Discussion

[EarthSeraphEdna]

I've got a quick question about the Slipstream cosmic ability. "If you are within the area of a time stop spell then you gain access to the additional rounds," is what part of its description says. What counts as the area of a time stop spell?

Perhaps Slipstream should say "If an ally or enemy within your divine aura goes under the effects of a time stop spell, or if an ally or enemy enters your divine aura while under the effects of a time stop spell, you may enter the accelerated time stream as a free action to gain access to the additional rounds and be able to interact with the other creatures inside."

 

[paradox42]

My understanding is that the power negated by Abrogate is not chosen by the deity that has Abrogate. The "most powerful ability" is objectively chosen (by the GM) and whether or not the deity knows what that ability is and what it does has no bearing on that.

I've been running it this way for my game. And I'll also note that, due to the vicissitudes of combat, which ability is most useful to the opponent (and thus, most powerful) may change from round to round, and IMO the Abrogate should change with it under such circumstances.

That's how I did it when my PCs (sub-divine, at the time) tracked down an artifact that can produce Abrogate for its user (or itself) at will. They each found the ability they rely upon most in their combat tactics, just plain not working. But they were warned of this nullification power in advance, and quickly figured out that if a new power stopped working, that meant that suddenly the previously negated one was back on. So they were able to deal with it eventually- it just took them longer to bring things to a successful conclusion than would otherwise have been the case.

 

[Ltheb Silverfrond]

Paradox, I am curious as to how you played the Abrogate. I have a PC in an upcoming game who makes use of it (and the end-villain likely will have it), so I wonder how you were adjudicating it. Said character is a Monk (Travel/Wisdom), so it only seems appropriate that he use his cosmic knowledge of nearly every martial art in the galaxy to defeat nearly any form of attack. Problem is, this description requires the foe to actually try to use the attack.

Now if Abrogate simply 'turns off' the capability to use a power, the foe would simply choose another action. I could describe it as sort of an abstraction, but I plan on taking some form of group vote after each adventure and assigning the character who did the coolest stuff some sort of expendable reward. (Like a Mega-Action point, or temporary access to an esoteric power, or some bonus Xp/Qp, bonus minions to divine retinue, etc)

If it foils their action outright without any forewarning, does this seem unfair vs the players?

Did you run abrogate a certain way?

 

[paradox42]

Paradox, I am curious as to how you played the Abrogate. I have a PC in an upcoming game who makes use of it (and the end-villain likely will have it), so I wonder how you were adjudicating it. Said character is a Monk (Travel/Wisdom), so it only seems appropriate that he use his cosmic knowledge of nearly every martial art in the galaxy to defeat nearly any form of attack. Problem is, this description requires the foe to actually try to use the attack.

Now if Abrogate simply 'turns off' the capability to use a power, the foe would simply choose another action. I could describe it as sort of an abstraction, but I plan on taking some form of group vote after each adventure and assigning the character who did the coolest stuff some sort of expendable reward. (Like a Mega-Action point, or temporary access to an esoteric power, or some bonus Xp/Qp, bonus minions to divine retinue, etc)

If it foils their action outright without any forewarning, does this seem unfair vs the players?

Did you run abrogate a certain way?

If I understand your question correctly, you're asking how the PCs saw the power, not how the players did? Basically, I decided each round which ability for each character would be shut off- and even for Epic PCs it tends to be a short list (if there's even more than one option). The character had no warning that the power wasn't there, in most cases, though the Bard who usually goes around incorporeal suddenly discovered to her horror that she couldn't just float right into the floor.

Basically, when the character tries to use the negated power, that's when he or she discovers it isn't working. For things that don't take actions to use, or are part of other actions, like the party tank's flying ability (which was negated early on in the battle, severely curtailing his movement options), this just forces the character to use other options (the tank just slogged on along the ground, such as it was- the battle was on a junk pile in the second layer of Acheron). If, on the other hand, the negated ability is a particular spell, such as when the party Sorceress tried to use Time Stop, the character tries to use it and it just fizzles- nothing happens. So that cost the Sorceress an action, but fortunately she has a few Greater Rods of Quicken so she got off another spell that round (I allow magic items to Quicken spontaneous spells- always figured it's silly to force casting time to increase if it's the magic item giving you the power to use it rather than the actual feat).

Some players may whine about unfairness, I suppose, but mine took it the way it was intended- as an extra challenge. It had the added benefit of making the players who had yet to act in the battle nervous, trying to think through and figure out which of their abilities were "shut off" that way. Extra layer of excitement, there. Plus, the players knew that if they won the artifact (which they eventually did), they'd have the chance to use this same power on enemies, and they were quite pleased about that. When the time came to use the Abrogate against enemies, I played it straight- the enemy had no way of knowing what was negated without trying to use it. And the enemy they used the artifact on indeed lost a couple of actions in the unpleasant discovery, to the players' delight.

 

[EarthSeraphEdna]

like the party tank's flying ability

I thought that movement speeds could not be negated, since those are technically not "abilities" in a creature's statblock at all? Of course, if the tank's movement speed came from an artifact, epic feat (Sky Walker), or a divine ability (Abnormality [Wings]), then I can see Abrogate working on any of those.

If, on the other hand, the negated ability is a particular spell, such as when the party Sorceress tried to use Time Stop, the character tries to use it and it just fizzles- nothing happens.

I thought that an enemy's entire spellcasting for one class could be negated, because in the Monster Manual, spellcasting is listed down as a single "special attack"?

Some players may whine about unfairness, I suppose, but mine took it the way it was intended- as an extra challenge. It had the added benefit of making the players who had yet to act in the battle nervous, trying to think through and figure out which of their abilities were "shut off" that way. Extra layer of excitement, there. Plus, the players knew that if they won the artifact (which they eventually did), they'd have the chance to use this same power on enemies, and they were quite pleased about that. When the time came to use the Abrogate against enemies, I played it straight- the enemy had no way of knowing what was negated without trying to use it. And the enemy they used the artifact on indeed lost a couple of actions in the unpleasant discovery, to the players' delight.

Abrogate may be simple (and in fact fun) to run, but what about Nullification, Divine Nullification, and Cosmic Nullification? Dead Zone as well. Those don't just negate one ability, they negate entire tiers of abilities.

DM: "Alright guys, the enemy has Nullification. All of your feats don't work any more."
Players: "Give us several minutes to rewrite our character sheets..."

It could get a bit tedious if the characters don't have extra character sheets prepared just for the purpose of the Nullification line of abilities.

 

[paradox42]

I thought that movement speeds could not be negated, since those are technically not "abilities" in a creature's statblock at all? Of course, if the tank's movement speed came from an artifact, epic feat (Sky Walker), or a divine ability (Abnormality [Wings]), then I can see Abrogate working on any of those.

Yes, that's the point. He's had Boots of Flying for so many real-time years I don't even remember when he got them now. And anyway now that he's a god (as indeed are all the PCs as of last week's session, with the exception of the item crafter who is still working on his ascension quest), it hardly matters anymore.

I thought that an enemy's entire spellcasting for one class could be negated, because in the Monster Manual, spellcasting is listed down as a single "special attack"?

To my view, that would be far too excessive. A spellcasting character is his or her spellcasting. Without that, the character may as well be twiddling his or her thumbs at home. Negating all the spellcasting just because the Monster Manual lists it as one ability (which, in fact, it doesn't- it always has a little "Spellcasting" section in the monster's complete description that lists the spell selection, caster level, and save DCs in detail) would be absurd. You wouldn't argue that just because a Balor, say, has several Spell-Like Abilities listed together as "Spell-Like Abilities" under "Special Attacks," that it loses all of them at once with just one measly Abrogate, would you? I mean, the very listing says "Abilities" (plural). There's more than one there.

Abrogate may be simple (and in fact fun) to run, but what about Nullification, Divine Nullification, and Cosmic Nullification? Dead Zone as well. Those don't just negate one ability, they negate entire tiers of abilities.

DM: "Alright guys, the enemy has Nullification. All of your feats don't work any more."
Players: "Give us several minutes to rewrite our character sheets..."

What about them? It just means that if they try to do anything requiring a feat, or what have you, that it doesn't work. It doesn't mean they suddenly don't have those feats or whatever. And feats (or whatever) that change a character's basic stats are easy enough to subtract out under most circumstances.

Besides, I haven't used those in my game yet.

It could get a bit tedious if the characters don't have extra character sheets prepared just for the purpose of the Nullification line of abilities.

Needlessly complicated. Nobody can run an Epic game for long without developing a talent for improvisation and seat-of-the-pants plotting, even if you like to set out with grand designs in mind. Part of the territory is an ability to "eyeball" stat changes on the fly, since there's no telling when a critter or character might get hit with an effect reducing the CON score, or blinding it, or any one of another hundred status changes. It should be simple enough to catch a player in the act, if he or she tries to use an ability that's been annulled.

 

[Colin_Fredericks]

I picked up Ascension today, and I really like some of the ideas you have in here. I'm glad I spent the money on it. All of the Resonance ideas, especially, are great plot-drivers for all levels.

I would strongly recommend sending the book to a professional editor. It costs about $1 per page for a good editor, it takes comparatively little of your time, and it will raise your review ratings by at least one star out of five. Since you're listed as #2 on RPGNow's top-ten list (congratulations! nice work!), I'm betting that you have $200 or more in profits already, and a professional edit is an investment well-spent. Not only will an editor take care of grammatical and punctuation problems, but he or she will also find places where text is missing, and even catch accidental inconsistencies created (as I well know) from years of cutting and pasting multiple versions together. I can't recommend it enough.

--Colin Fredericks

 

[Farealmer3]

All this discussion on abrogate has given me a question for U_K. First, would abrogate nullify a wizards spellcasting(as discussed above)? Second, would it abrogate an ability that has multiple uses like silver surfer's power cosmic? And lastly, would it abrogate Superman's ability to absorb yellow sunlight or marvel Thor's ability to use his hammer?

 

[Ltheb Silverfrond]

If I understand your question correctly, you're asking how the PCs saw the power, not how the players did? Basically, I decided each round which ability for each character would be shut off- and even for Epic PCs it tends to be a short list (if there's even more than one option). The character had no warning that the power wasn't there, in most cases, though the Bard who usually goes around incorporeal suddenly discovered to her horror that she couldn't just float right into the floor.

Basically, when the character tries to use the negated power, that's when he or she discovers it isn't working. For things that don't take actions to use, or are part of other actions, like the party tank's flying ability (which was negated early on in the battle, severely curtailing his movement options), this just forces the character to use other options (the tank just slogged on along the ground, such as it was- the battle was on a junk pile in the second layer of Acheron). If, on the other hand, the negated ability is a particular spell, such as when the party Sorceress tried to use Time Stop, the character tries to use it and it just fizzles- nothing happens. So that cost the Sorceress an action, but fortunately she has a few Greater Rods of Quicken so she got off another spell that round (I allow magic items to Quicken spontaneous spells- always figured it's silly to force casting time to increase if it's the magic item giving you the power to use it rather than the actual feat).

Some players may whine about unfairness, I suppose, but mine took it the way it was intended- as an extra challenge. It had the added benefit of making the players who had yet to act in the battle nervous, trying to think through and figure out which of their abilities were "shut off" that way. Extra layer of excitement, there. Plus, the players knew that if they won the artifact (which they eventually did), they'd have the chance to use this same power on enemies, and they were quite pleased about that. When the time came to use the Abrogate against enemies, I played it straight- the enemy had no way of knowing what was negated without trying to use it. And the enemy they used the artifact on indeed lost a couple of actions in the unpleasant discovery, to the players' delight.

Thanks for the info. I like that interpretation: (Most potent option at the time automatically fails).
On Farealmer's Questions on abrogate: I think it could nullify spellcasting. (since it can bring their spellcasting score to '10') (This seems a bit harsh, but given its easy to get a 'zillion metamagic capacity feats, min-maxers should have something to worry about; Plus it encourages them to take more divine powers.) I think it could nullify a single power with multiple options. (Like Anyfeat) Or perhaps a Single Artifact (canceling out all of it's benefits; Sorry Thor, without that belt of yours, that hammer is looking pretty heavy...). I don't think it could nullify Superman's source of Power (Since that would sort of equate to nullifying a deity's divinity; His powers would likely be counted as seperate) However, it could probably nullify a facet of his power. (Flight, Strength, Invulnerability, Ability to heal quickly, Etc)
Just my 2 cents.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey there Colin_Fredericks!

I picked up Ascension today, and I really like some of the ideas you have in here. I'm glad I spent the money on it. All of the Resonance ideas, especially, are great plot-drivers for all levels.

Thanks for the kind words.

I would strongly recommend sending the book to a professional editor. It costs about $1 per page for a good editor, it takes comparatively little of your time, and it will raise your review ratings by at least one star out of five.

Funny you mention it, I just today (almost by accident) read John Cooper's review (on these forums) for Monster Manual V by Wizards of the Coast. In his review he states that there is a 55% chance of stat block mistakes in that book. This is a book with three professional editors and one professional editing manager. He also goes on to mention several other errors (outside the stat blocks).

This is a book with about 17 professional writers, four editors and the resources of by far the biggest PnP RPG company behind them.

I'm one writer (also doing the layout and art duties while trying to keep a part time job) with one editor who basically works for free copies and a bunch of die hard immortal fans who help out for free. Contrast that with WotC and Eternity Publishing is basically the smallest PnP RPG company with the least resources.

So, realistically speaking, if WotC can't get it right what chance do we have? Thats not to say we don't try our best (time allowed).

Since you're listed as #2 on RPGNow's top-ten list (congratulations! nice work!), I'm betting that you have $200 or more in profits already,

Oh its a tad more than that, and thats way before counting the beta version buyers. Of course the US dollar doesn't go a long way here in the UK, but if I imagine the dollars are really pounds I can almost pretend I could make a living from this sort of thing...assuming I could release a book every 3 months.

But under the assumption that I had made $200 profit so far, theres no way I could justify $163 for an editor. I may as well work for free if thats the case.

and a professional edit is an investment well-spent. Not only will an editor take care of grammatical and punctuation problems, but he or she will also find places where text is missing, and even catch accidental inconsistencies created (as I well know) from years of cutting and pasting multiple versions together. I can't recommend it enough.

Technically my book isn't finished yet. I know thats an easy excuse, but I always make a point of reading over the entire document before I consider it finished. I just haven't had the time to do that yet, and with the book in the limbo of being 'almost but not quite finished' I'm waiting until its done before I do that.

I hope the mistakes haven't dampened your enthusiasm too much and thanks again for the feedback.