Immortals Handbook - Ascension Discussion

[dante58701]

But does that give them the Fire subtype?

Also...the Bonus Domain question. Do you get it for the portfolios you possess? Is it considered integrated?

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hiya dante mate!

But does that give them the Fire subtype?

Good question. Sort of - the mechanics are woven into the Fire Portfolio(s). Can you think of a case where the nomenclature of not having the Fire Subtype will confuse the situation?

Also...the Bonus Domain question. Do you get it for the portfolios you possess? Is it considered integrated?

The bonus domain feat gives you a bonus domain, nothing more. If I have 2 portfolios then I take the bonus domain feat I have two portfolios and a bonus domain. If I then gain a 3rd portfolio (the same as the bonus domain I took with the feat) the portfolio supercedes the feat and I would let you choose a different domain as your bonus feat.

 

[WarDragon]

Not what he asked, Krust. He meant, if a deity with cleric levels takes Extra Portfolio, can it prepare the spells associated with that portfolio in its domain slots and get the granted power? I would assume yes, from the latter part of your answer, but want to make sure.

 

[paradox42]

The question really hinges on what deities with Cleric levels get by getting Portfolios in the first place, I'd suggest. The key point is exactly what a Portfolio gives a Cleric, not what specifically the Extra Portfolio ability gives.

In my own games, I'll mention, this has already come up- because all of the PCs in one game are now divine, and all of the PCs in the other game that are still mortal, are pursuing Portfolio quests to cross the threshold. So the thing about the Domain granted power being sort-of-but-not-really part of the Portfolio has been noticed. I ruled that although having a Portfolio lets the deity use all of the Domain spells as SLAs, it does not mean that the deity has the Domain in the same way that a Cleric has it- unless the deity is itself a Cleric. In the case of a Cleric-turned-god, the Cleric gets access to the Domain and its power as part of gaining the Portfolio. Deities without Cleric levels essentially have nothing to "attach" the Domain on to, and therefore do not gain the ability to cast the Domain spells as spells (irrelevant since they gain them as at-will SLAs, but a distinction nevertheless) and do not gain the Domain's granted power.

That's just my take for my games of course; Krusty may have had a different one in mind. OTOH, if he never before considered this issue, perhaps the specific ruling I made for my games (and explained above) will help him resolve the issue for himself. And the rest of his readers.

 

[Fieari]

I think it may be important to have the subtype of fire in addition to the benefits, because the subtype adds a weakness-- it's possible for certain clerics to turn/rebuke [elemental] subtype creatures, and if I were a level 100 cleric with such an ability, I'd feel gypped if I couldn't turn a mere prophet of fire.

 

[Alzrius]

Table 4-14: Cosmic Abilities notes that the prerequisites for Heavy Eradication are "Moderate Eradication, Str 40." However, the listing for Heavy Eradication notes that the prerequisites are Moderate Eradication, Str 70.

Table 4-11: Divine Abilities notes that the prerequisites for Moderate Eradication are "Light Eradication, Str 40." However, the listing for Moderate Eradication notes that the prerequisites are just Str 40.

The Superior Critical Divine Ability notes that it quadruples critical threat range. It then lists an example, saying that a weapon that scores a critical threat on a 20 now has a range of 16-20. In fact, this is a quintupling, not a quadrupling. A quadrupled threat range would be 17-20.

I'm somewhat confused about when the various "Weapon Focus," "Weapon Specialization" "Critical" and "Critical Multiplier" feats apply to a specific weapon, and when they have blanket effects. I'm going to list the various feats in order of presentation, and say whether they're by weapon, or universal. Please let me know if these are right or wrong:

Greater Critical: by weapon.
Greater Critical Multiplier: by weapon.
Improved Critical Multiplier: by weapon.
Perfect Weapon Focus: universal.
Perfect Weapon Specialization: by weapon.
Superior Critical: by weapon.
Superior Critical Multiplier: by weapon.
Threatening Critical: universal.
Uncanny Weapon Focus: universal.
Uncanny Weapon Specialization: universal.
Perfect Critical: by weapon.
Perfect Critical Multiplier: by weapon.
Unearthly Weapon Focus: universal.
Unearthly Weapon Specialization: by weapon.
Ultimate Weapon Focus: universal.
Ultimate Weapon Specialization: universal.

EDIT: Table 4-6: New Epic Feats notes that the prerequisites for Superior Sunder are "Greater Sunder, Str 25." However, the listing for Greater Sunder notes that the prerequisites are just Str 25. Moreover, the description for Superior Sunder in Table 4-6 is the description for Greater Sunder, copied there.

The last sentence for the Uncanny Power Attack epic feat could be confusing to some. "Your power attack bonus cannot exceed your base attack bonus." Some people might think that means the damage bonus you get from that feat cannot exceed your BAB; The entire Benefit line should be reworded to say that you automatically power attack for the amount exceeding your attack roll, to a maximum of your BAB.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey guys!

Not what he asked, Krust. He meant, if a deity with cleric levels takes Extra Portfolio, can it prepare the spells associated with that portfolio in its domain slots and get the granted power? I would assume yes, from the latter part of your answer, but want to make sure.

Absolutely.

I also agree that simply adding the subtypes in these matters will go some way to avoiding confusion. So I'll be doing that next time I make some amendments.

 

[bigg2006]

Hey UK!

Hope you're hale and hearty!

I have a couple of questions for you.

1) Would Ultimate Weapon Focus cancel out Thelemic Damage Induction? I'm assuming it would with the attack being transcendental in nature and the defence being cosmic.

2) Does Sophism give you the ability to ignore only magic (as the ability table states) or the ability to ignore any attack (as the entry states)? If it can cancel out any attack, would this still be overcome by Ultimate Weapon Focus? Again I would guess that it would (otherwise it's not very ultimate!)

Cheers!

 

[Ltheb Silverfrond]

I don't thing either of those two defenses cancel out Ultimate Weapon Focus. Thelemic Damage Induction makes you impervious to attacks. They hit, but do nothing. So UWF doesn't really interact. (Except to make it at least gives you a chance to win if the foe happens to also have other defenses)
Sophism... I have no idea. The text says 'Avoid.' One could read that as meaning 'the attacker auto misses' or 'the attack does nothing'. If it means the attack does nothing, then it's the same deal as Thelemic Damage Induction. If it's attacker misses, then I would think UWF might apply. (or not, as mechanically UWF seems to only care about the attack roll)
As for what Sophism actually blocks... U_K needs to clarify that.

 

[bigg2006]

Thanks Ltheb. The explanation of Thelemic Damage Induction makes a lot of sense. The character with UWF maybe couldn't do any damage to them directly but other abilities he might have, such as Anaretic, should still work because he would still make contact. (I'm assuming that Thelemic Damage Induction doesn't cast its protective blanket over artifacts as well). It also makes TDI a good way to withstand the onslaught of a real combat monster and allow your character to make good their escape.

As far as Sophism goes I'm hoping it only covers magic attacks. Given that the ability is tied to a character's wisdom score it would make sense to give it to a sidereal with the wisdom portfolio (or double portfolio). Certainly with the double porfolio, which generates such huge wisdom scores for sidereals, this could make Sophism akin to 'total and perpetual invulnerability' if it covers any kind of attack, magical or otherwise. If it's just magic attacks that can be ignored then at least another approach can be used to deal with the character (maybe even that combat monster with UWF!) It would also seem to make sense because magic itself is a way of altering reality. Sophism would then give the recipient the ablity to deny that reality altering effect (at least as far as it would affect them).

A physical assault could be seen as reality altering (warhammer impacts head of enemy, head flattened, reality for victim definitely altered) but its a bit more direct and down to earth. As such I reckon it should be impossible to disbelieve physical attacks or actions. It's just too open to abuse otherwise. Think of Reed Richards and Galactus for example. Reed (the player) decides that he has no choice other than to use the ultimate nullifier. He pulls the trigger and...nothing happens. Galactus (the DM) uses his Sophism ability to disbelieve Richards pulling the trigger. Lots of sulky players accusing the DM of abusing his power. And that"s only if the DM uses Sophism. Lord knows what would happen if the players got a hold of it! The DM would have to send in an entire army of Neutronium Golems to get them back into line!