Immortals Handbook - Ascension Discussion

eduar

First Post
It's discussions like this that make me think of Pathfinder as "3.5, but better" since it doesn't have any sort of greater turning where a successful turning attempt automatically destroys undead creatures. :p

Agree, but is a shame that Pathfinder don't have epic rules yet
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Howdy Nezkrul! :)

Nezkrul said:
New Divine Ability:

Potent Planar Channeling

Prereq's: Channel Positive Energy (or Negative), Planar Turning Epic Feat, Cha 30, Wis 30

Benefit: You may ignore an Outsider's turn resistance derived from its spell resistance when you attempt to turn or rebuke it (or destroy or command).

Thanks.

Ok, and Sorry krust for me sounding kinda hostile, didn't mean to. But I will answer your questions.

No worries amigo, didn't sound hostile at all. :)

Having the Sun domain, and/or having at least 1 level in the Radiant Servant of _insert Sun Deity_ PrC, or having an effective turning level of at least double the target's hit dice. My example character has all 10 levels of the PrC, the other 30 in cleric. I don't think the PrC forces a roleplaying penalty onto you once you become a deity yourself, I think it simply helps define what kind of deity you will become, since not every cleric is built like yours.

Indeed.

Yes, all is fair in love and war (and DnD). What ever the players can do, the GM can do (and do it better). The only thing stopping the GM from making the game not fun for the players is the fact that he might not have players anymore. But, IMO, the GM has every right to use an evil cleric with the new divine ability I put up top, who did exactly what I did in building himself, the only thing is he WON'T have the Radiant Servant ability to have more than 1 greater turning attempt every day, so that would by my character's advantage. He likely won't even have ANY greater turning attempts, depends on if an evil character can take the Sun domain.

True but I think this would get massively annoying to players.

In this case, I would call that evil cleric my Archnemesis, and a very nice and indepth story or roleplaying experience would likely ensue, since neither of us want to risk losing initiative against the other on our home plane. We would both likely research powers that would either make us resistant to turning or immune, and then we may challenge eachother, however such research wouldn't protect our friends/minions so those would still get toasted... if we ever had a showdown, it would likely be on neutral ground (more often than not).

Cool...although it need not be an evil cleric necessarily.

Epic is all about being broken, and then if you acquire deific power, then well, yah. I hope you don't expect your players to build gimped characters just for the sake of roleplaying such that you have to modify encounters so they can roleplay and not die to the rollplay.

Epic is about characters breaking the laws of physics rather than necessarily breaking the laws of the game.

Wizards do this from level 7 and up. Sorcerers 8 and up. Druids can do it from 9 and up, and Clerics can do it from 9 and up. No deific power required. Unless of course, what you mean when you say "above your level" is actually "vastly above your character's level where he should just be able to one shot you", to which I say ORLY? I can't one shot him but it's ok for him to one shot me?

This would allow a saving throw AND spell resistance. Your ability ignores turning resistance and is just an auto-kill, slight difference.

I'm ok with the GM running his game however he wants, adapt and overcome his challenges, even if they are hard. It's how you define your character as he advances, if he had the easy street the whole time he'll be a show off know-it-all that thinks he can beat anyone.... likewise if he had gotten his arse beat at every turn, sometimes even ended up dead and luckily got brought back (sometimes more than once) he would be a cautious, scrutinizing, shrewd tactician whenever he encountered something or someone he has never seen before.

One problem that could arise is that in order to challenge the party, the DM now has to use monsters so much more powerful that the party can't defeat them.

again this is something that has been happening since level 7 for the wizard, etc... One hit kills are 99% better than just damage dealing spells, and Save or Screw'ds or the Word series of spells are just as good as one hit kills because they let the party win easily. Magic is powerful, you just gotta deal with it, it's part of the game.

...or something that should be errata'ed.

I'm going to suggest a saving throw to resist the destruction, something along the lines of 10 +1/2 levels in turning classes +CHA mod +Divine Rank; or you could call it temporary destruction on a creatures homeplane since all it is really doing is using positive or negative energy to disrupt the manifestation - not actually destroy it utterly... that would still allow the defeated to rejuvenate (and so it would be nigh useless against Sidereals and higher, but at that point combat shouldn't be occurring)

Sounds like a good idea.

I was looking for opinions because I was thinking I had found a powerful way to deal with evil deities and other nasties. Looks like I did, but like I said earlier it requires all of the character's resources to work; and that trade-off to me makes it ok. The hard part is getting enough turning damage. You need a really high charisma score, the glory domain, and the empower turning feat to make it work. Not to mention the turning level.

The problem with this sort of advantage is that every 'roll'-player would play that build.

And he can't do it to all outsiders, only evil ones, so if some of them potential enemies get smart, they'll start putting up contingent atonement's with their wishes or alter reality ability strictly for shifting their alignment to neutral whenever they get attacked by a holy sun cleric from on high :p

The power might belong to a sun demon, evil sun god, or possibly undead. I was planning a monster called an Egregori (Shining Shadow) which is like a reverse shadow that can turn player characters.

Which brings me to a few rules questions. Does a deity's wishes/day ability or their alter reality ability cost them XP or QP?

In my opinion it should cost them XP/QP.

When you become a hero-deity (or higher), do you spend money/xp/qp to gain your artifacts? how does one go about acquiring them? For instance, how does a Fighter based hero-deity get his 4 artifacts?

I don't think there is any one method here.

One character might find an artifact, another might create one, a weapon you have been carrying for ages might reveal itself to have always been an artifact, a god may grant a character an artifact. So there is no one way.

What might be possible is spinning a quest around obtaining an artifact much in the same way as gaining a portfolio.

I'm sure this one has been asked before but what is the level adjustment of the divinity templates? Is it just the ECL bump? Cuz after making a simple Hero-Deity I was kinda sad that it would now suddenly take this guy like 30 times as long to gain his next class level (based off ECL bump being LA).

That's all for now.

Well it shouldn't take 30 times as long because you will be fighting enemies (on average) 30 CR higher.
 

Nezkrul

First Post
Epic is about characters breaking the laws of physics rather than necessarily breaking the laws of the game.
walking on clouds with balance, or squeezing through a wall of force with escape artist? you bet! ;)
This would allow a saving throw AND spell resistance. Your ability ignores turning resistance and is just an auto-kill, slight difference... One problem that could arise is that in order to challenge the party, the DM now has to use monsters so much more powerful that the party can't defeat them.
Many many many ways for casters to boost their caster level so high spell resistance don't matter, and many ways to altogether ignore spell resistance (innate spell + supernatural transformation). My auto kill only works if their HD is at or below my effective turning level, and only if they are undead or evil outsiders. This means oozes, elementals, all non-evil outsiders, magical beasts, constructs, dragons, plants, giants, monstrous humanoids, humanoids, aberrations, fey, and animals are all not auto-killable to this guy.
...or something that should be errata'ed.
if you think magic is too powerful, buff the non-magic folk, don't nerf what the whole reality of the game is about.
The problem with this sort of advantage is that every 'roll'-player would play that build.
And then the party of four sun deity pc's dies to a group of extraplanar pseudonatural aberrations from outerspace, since they all want to be able to 'roll'-play the advantage.
In my opinion it should cost them XP/QP.
if so, deities need way more at-will spell-like abilities to compensate, since now their infinite power is finite.
Well it shouldn't take 30 times as long because you will be fighting enemies (on average) 20 CR higher.
fixed... cr is only 2/3 la. ;) still takes forever and a day to now gain a level.
 

Howdy Nezkrul! :)

Nezkrul said:
walking on clouds with balance, or squeezing through a wall of force with escape artist? you bet! ;)

Well yes, it was badly implemented into the Epic Level Handbook but I think I fixed that with Ascension by making it possible through epic feats instead.

Many many many ways for casters to boost their caster level so high spell resistance don't matter, and many ways to altogether ignore spell resistance (innate spell + supernatural transformation). My auto kill only works if their HD is at or below my effective turning level, and only if they are undead or evil outsiders. This means oozes, elementals, all non-evil outsiders, magical beasts, constructs, dragons, plants, giants, monstrous humanoids, humanoids, aberrations, fey, and animals are all not auto-killable to this guy.

Luckily then undead and evil outsiders are about 75% of the published epic monster types. :)

if you think magic is too powerful, buff the non-magic folk, don't nerf what the whole reality of the game is about.

I think you probably need to strike a balance between the two...more specifically through nerfing insta-kill and really broken stuff.

And then the party of four sun deity pc's dies to a group of extraplanar pseudonatural aberrations from outerspace, since they all want to be able to 'roll'-play the advantage.

If one player dominates the game too much it becomes annoying for the rest of the players.

if so, deities need way more at-will spell-like abilities to compensate, since now their infinite power is finite.

Deities have a bazillion options already and what made you think their power was meant to be infinite anyway?

fixed... cr is only 2/3 la. ;) still takes forever and a day to now gain a level.

Ignore XP then and just allow PCs to level up after each adventure.
 

Nezkrul

First Post
If one player dominates the game too much it becomes annoying for the rest of the players.
completely the GM's fault, not the player's. Also, why didn't the other players build optimized characters if this player did? again, not that player's fault.

Deities have a bazillion options already and what made you think their power was meant to be infinite anyway?
Alter Reality power is the "infinite" part. And having wish as a spell-like ability 12/day is all fine and dandy, but if they use XP for it I'm pretty darn sure they would never use their ability 12 times in one day (just an example, i know not all of them have it that much). So, this would be an example of "wasted ECL bump" since the character would technically delevel using his abilities over time, instead of gainging levels. With faerun deity rules, only a few of the better deities had Alter Reality power, and it had drawbacks to using it but didn't cost them resources that help them advance... what I'm saying is that if you have a deific power, IMO using it shouldn't make you go backwards.

21 / 60 monsters in the epic level handbook are outsiders or undead, but not all of them are evil.
 
Last edited:

Alzrius

The EN World kitten
completely the GM's fault, not the player's. Also, why didn't the other players build optimized characters if this player did? again, not that player's fault.

The first part of your statement is something I can partially agree with. The GM should work to challenge all of the players, and if one of the players is better in one area than the others, the GM should account for that and adjust the encounters accordingly.

However, this doesn't completely absolve that player of the unspoken-but-still-important understanding that they're not deliberately trying to outshine the other players. If their character just happens to be better than the other players in a given situation, that just happens; if he's trying to be "better" than they are, then he's ruining other people's fun. That makes it his fault, not the GM's.

Likewise, the other players are not at fault in any regard. Saying that they're to blame because they didn't optimize their characters is just faulty logic. Players should coordinate to the degree that they don't step on each other's toes when trying to make a balanced party (e.g. everyone doesn't end up playing a bard), but beyond that saying "well it's your fault for not making your character as powerful as mine" completely ignores the fact that people are supposed to be making characters for the purpose of having fun, not to try and play catch-up to somebody who's interested in power-playing.
 

Nezkrul

First Post
me having a powerful character takes away your fun? not my problem. GM keeps throwing us into situations where my character outshines yours? not my problem.

A party of 4 bards is pretty bad ass, actually.
 

Alzrius

The EN World kitten
me having a powerful character takes away your fun? not my problem. GM keeps throwing us into situations where my character outshines yours? not my problem.

Again, this depends on how you slice it. If your character is ruining the fun for everyone else playing, then it is indeed your problem - that is, it's a problem caused by you.

Now, if it's just a question of the PCs always ending up in situations where one character can excel while the others are ineffective, then the GM does need to switch things up. But if everyone else is playing a non-min-maxed character, while you have something from the CharOp boards, then your character is most likely going to be a problem.

There's more to being a good player than just knowing how to max out bonuses.
 

Nezkrul

First Post
Again, this depends on how you slice it. If your character is ruining the fun for everyone else playing, then it is indeed your problem - that is, it's a problem caused by you.
how does my powerful character ruin your fun? if you say "because you're in the spot light and not me" that IS NOT my problem, nor is it a problem caused by my character. Instead of complaining about someone having a strong character, why don't you ask them to help you make yours stronger, ask them for tips on specializing, and other options. Getting mad at them and having less fun simply because they have a strong character (whether or not you do too) is the wrong answer, and you should probably just stop playing D&D.

And there's more to D&D than roleplaying. Getting mad because one player built his character to be good at the roll part and you didn't is the wrong answer.
 

Alzrius

The EN World kitten
how does my powerful character ruin your fun? if you say "because you're in the spot light and not me" that IS NOT my problem, nor is it a problem caused by my character. Instead of complaining about someone having a strong character, why don't you ask them to help you make yours stronger, ask them for tips on specializing, and other options. Getting mad at them and having less fun simply because they have a strong character (whether or not you do too) is the wrong answer, and you should probably just stop playing D&D.

There are different ways of looking at it. D&D is ultimately a collaborative effort among the players (including the GM), and the PCs are meant to work as a team (single-player games, and the occasional bout of PvP notwithstanding). Being focused solely on having a character who does their own thing, with no consideration for the team, tends to get in the way of the people who are trying to have fun as part of the team.

Now, to be fair, that's not what you were saying. However, in my experience, being focused on squeezing as much out of the mechanics as possible and insisting that no aspect of it is your problem tends to be the road to that aforementioned team-less manner of playing.

Some people don't want a character that's optimized and min-maxed. They may not want a weak character, but they can put what's thematically appropriate ahead of what's going to pump up their combat potential. If everyone else is trying to have fun with characters that are made around an idea, rather than a "build," then someone who continually shows them up - in effect punishing them for not being as good as him - is impacting their fun.

Ultimately, everyone has to be able to play nice together. If you're more focused on doing your own thing, and telling everyone else "just stop playing D&D" when they mention that your thing is getting in the way of theirs, then maybe you need to reexamine just who needs to stop playing.

And there's more to D&D than roleplaying. Getting mad because one player built his character to be good at the roll part and you didn't is the wrong answer.

Given that it's a role-playing game, one might say that without that it's just a game. :p

In all seriousness though, it's not about getting mad at someone else for being too strong. It's about getting mad at them because they don't play well with others.
 

Remove ads

Top