Immortal's Handbook continuation thread continuation

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Clay_More mate!

Kewl, you noticed it.

Of course!

I was actually talking about this thread though

Okay.

No need to get involved, you gave some excellent advice on the Vampire.

Well I wouldn't call it excellent advice, but I am glad I could help

Its just this old, danish fart that wants to redo everything (hmmm, seems I know an old, irish fart with the same tendencies).

Just had one question from the Vamp thread, in the end, I wanted to re-ask. Was there going to be any "playtesting" volumes of IH available for the most faithful of followers?

At the moment I hope to have a copy of the first section with me at Gencon UK (it will probably be without art at that point, even though I plan to have most if not all of the art ready by then). If possible I will try to have a few copies available.

However, often the best laid plans...

How did you rate the different classes?

While I'm sure explaining myself is going to lead to more questions and problems...

PC Wealth 20%
Hit Points +5% per average point
BAB +5% per measure (poor/average/good)
Saves +5% (good save) +2.5% (bad save)
Standard Feat & Ability Score progression +10%
Skills +1% per skill multiplier

eg. Fighter

d10 hp = +30% (5.5 = 6 average)
good BAB = +15%
one good save, two bad = +10%
standard feat & abilityy score progression = +10%
skills x2 = +2%

So far +67%

Wealth = +20%

Class Features +1 Feat every other level. We know a feat is on average +0.2 CR (20%); but its a feat every other level so that figure is halved to +10%

Final Total 97% (77% without wealth)

Of course the extra feat at 1st-level makes it slightly higher but that benefit gets stretched to the point where its irrelevant.

I still find it amazing that Fighter rated so low, compared to the fact that it is probably the most played class. I can though understand why the Cleric got high points. In my opinion, the Cleric when properly buffed kicks ass on any fighter. Druid is pretty strong too, good spells with the combination of offensive / buffing / healing.

Absolutely.

Do you, a little off-topic, use the normal Ranger for your game?

I know S'mon has made some changes but I am not sure what they are, and no one plays a Ranger in his campaign.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Anubis mate!

Not *exactly*, but . . . And this statement is more for those wondering this than for you, because I think you know this already, although it applies all the same . . . Do those ability scores provide the same amount of power as LEVELS? The answer, of course, is no.

Actually, I wouldn't be so sure.

Once you get past low-levels where (as we discussed) luck (not ability) can be the predominant factor of character demise. I would say the ability scores would be just as beneficial (if not more, provided you could add the points where you wanted).

Ask any player. Would you give up four levels of experience for +40 to your stats, with the condition that you will continue to fight the same monsters you are already fighting? Any and every player (save for the munchkins) will answer no to this question.

Like I said. At relatively low levels, four class levels will give a character the 'safety net' (primarily regarding hit points) they wouldn't otherwise have. After the fear of an early bath is removed the ability scores are just as pertinent.

Basically, the fact is that the ability scores do NOT make a *significant* difference to the challenge level.

Actually, they do.

Yes, the character is tougher, but not LEVELS tougher. To say a character with 18 in every stat is the same challenge as a character four levels higher does not work.

It does work.

It just doesn't counter the luck factor at really low levels, which the safety net of more hit points does.

The Stone Giant is CR 9 (revised) and so is a character with five levels and 18 in every score (based on the system that does include ability scores . . . or would he be CR 10?). (By the way, these are based on the current available UK PDF.) I am willing to bet all my books and my soul that the Stone Giant is still far more powerful.

The Stone Giant rates CR 12.9 (rounded to 13) with the new system. That means CR 7 (difficult)

HD +7.7
SZ +0.5
NA +1.1
SA/Q +0.4
AS +3.2

Therefore its the equivalent of a 9th-level character with PC equipment and all 18 scores. Which I think is about right.

Any questions?

Nope. The more I discuss this the more I am returning to the idea that ability scores as an integral part of the system.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hello again mate!

Okay, from initial research, it looks like it IS possible to leave out the ability scores once you use the new numbers you came up with for HD. You would HAVE TO, however, increase the value of size as follows:

Fine -8
Diminutive -4
Tiny -2
Small -1
Large +1
Huge +2
Gargantuan +4
Colossal +8

OR make it a flat +1/-1. I'm still researching that.

I already have this. If you don't want to factor ability scores:

Fine -1
Dim -1
Tiny -0.75
Small -0.5

Large +1.5
Huge +3
Gar +4.5
Col +6

 

[Anubis]

Nope. The more I discuss this the more I am returning to the idea that ability scores as an integral part of the system.

Yet they aren't. There is no evidence to support this. In fact, if you rate them using the old numbers and then by the new numbers, and then compare, I think you'll find that the numbers almost always come out at the exact same ratio.

In fact, if you don't count ability scores, even the Pit Fiend comes out correctly on both ends!

You can't count ability scores. I could've sworn I got through to you when we spoke and got you to figure it out.

When all else fails, though . . . I got one last thing to suggest . . .

PLAYTEST IT. Playtest NOT using the ability scores to determine CR. Playtest it and you'll see that EVERYTHING comes out correct. Stop guessing, I've already playtested this idea and seen it. Now you do the same. Actually PLAY A GAME and don't use the ability scores to determine anything. PLAY IT. Heck, without counting ability scores, you finally fix the low level problem. If you DO count the ability scores, you SEVERELY overestimate Level 1-3 characters, because they can be "an equal challenge as an ogre" which anyone with any common sense can tell you is utterly INSANE.

Anyway, playtest it. I dare you. You'll see my numbers work, just as they do for me.

 

[poilbrun]

Yet they aren't. There is no evidence to support this. In fact, if you rate them using the old numbers and then by the new numbers, and then compare, I think you'll find that the numbers almost always come out at the exact same ratio.

In fact, if you don't count ability scores, even the Pit Fiend comes out correctly on both ends!

You can't count ability scores. I could've sworn I got through to you when we spoke and got you to figure it out.

When all else fails, though . . . I got one last thing to suggest . . .

PLAYTEST IT. Playtest NOT using the ability scores to determine CR. Playtest it and you'll see that EVERYTHING comes out correct. Stop guessing, I've already playtested this idea and seen it. Now you do the same. Actually PLAY A GAME and don't use the ability scores to determine anything. PLAY IT. Heck, without counting ability scores, you finally fix the low level problem. If you DO count the ability scores, you SEVERELY overestimate Level 1-3 characters, because they can be "an equal challenge as an ogre" which anyone with any common sense can tell you is utterly INSANE.

Anyway, playtest it. I dare you. You'll see my numbers work, just as they do for me.

I do not entirely agree. Maybe UK overrated the ability scores, but you cannot say that high ability scores have no impact, whether at low level or high level. A wizard with 18 CON has twice the hp of the same wizard with 10 CON at level 1. Same thing for the spell DC of any class with spells. A 8 point difference in the ability score is +4 DC of the saving throws. If you look at it only once, that can already make a difference. But if you look at it through the tnire life of a character, how many enemies will fail the ST because of this DC 4 points higher. What about simply a +2 to STR for a fighter. OK, it just gives him a +1 to attack bonus and damage, but on the long run, without this bonus, he may not have hit several times, and fallen 1 point short of killing a creature, which enabled the creature to launch one last attack that killed a member of the party.

In my mind, there is no doubt that ability scores have an impact on characters, and as such should be taken into account. What impact it should have, I do not know (I'm terrible at rule balance). Maybe we could say : for every point over a point buy of 28, +x to CR?

 

[Anubis]

I do not entirely agree. Maybe UK overrated the ability scores, but you cannot say that high ability scores have no impact, whether at low level or high level. A wizard with 18 CON has twice the hp of the same wizard with 10 CON at level 1. Same thing for the spell DC of any class with spells. A 8 point difference in the ability score is +4 DC of the saving throws. If you look at it only once, that can already make a difference. But if you look at it through the tnire life of a character, how many enemies will fail the ST because of this DC 4 points higher. What about simply a +2 to STR for a fighter. OK, it just gives him a +1 to attack bonus and damage, but on the long run, without this bonus, he may not have hit several times, and fallen 1 point short of killing a creature, which enabled the creature to launch one last attack that killed a member of the party.

In my mind, there is no doubt that ability scores have an impact on characters, and as such should be taken into account. What impact it should have, I do not know (I'm terrible at rule balance). Maybe we could say : for every point over a point buy of 28, +x to CR?

Nope. It simply doesn't work. One look at the FACT that counting CRs could place PCs as "powerful" a CR as things like the ogre will prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt. So no. The ability scores DO have an impact, but in the overall course of the game, it's not enough to warrant a change in level, CR, EL, or anything else. In fact, I would dare say that the ability scores are already factored into levels and classes. That's why I supported the standard array exception where anything "above the norm" is counted but normal scores do not.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi all!

I haven't been able to access the boards for 24 hours for some reason? Anyway, I tried to post this yesterday...

Hi Alzrius mate!

Thanks U_K! I saw that pic and just knew I had to have it as my avatar!

Meow!

But on to the other questions I thought up (hope these haven't come up before - if so, sorry!)...

Don't worry about that, ask away!

Given that the current rumors are that the ELH and D&Dg are going to be released into the SRD in April (or so we've heard),

Yep.

and the Immortal's Handbook will be released immediately after that,

Within reason. I will be in London for 10 days in April (for Gencon UK), that could interefere with any release. I would say that if the SRD is updated anytime in April I should have the first section available by the end of April, *touch wood*.

does that mean that you aren't planning on worrying about 3.5E changes, or are you trying to work in the changes as we learn about them (some of the monster changes discussed in Savage Species, for example), or will just give us a 3.5E update later, or what?

There are some balance changes I am making, whether they are the same as what the Revised Core Rulebooks will show I don't know. If there are any pertinent revelations in the Revised Core Rulebooks I have the proviso to integrate them into the Print Version of the IH (which won't be available until after the Revised Core Rulebooks are available no matter what).

Also, how much of the book will you release as OGC (not counting the mechanics that are/will be in the SRD, since those are OGC by their very nature)?

At this point it looks like the entire first section minus the various deity examples will be OGC. So all the actual 'rules' as it were.

If this book is as cool as it sounds like its gonna be, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of other people wanted to use its material...

I never really thought about it, but I suppose it would be cool to have people working on stuff, using and expanding (I hope) my ideas.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Anubis mate!

Yet they aren't. There is no evidence to support this.

On the contrary, all the evidence corroborates this!

The question is not 'do ability scores have an impact', the question is can we get away without factoring them?'

In fact, if you rate them using the old numbers and then by the new numbers, and then compare, I think you'll find that the numbers almost always come out at the exact same ratio.

In fact, if you don't count ability scores, even the Pit Fiend comes out correctly on both ends!

The problem with simply ignoring ability scores (while appealing from a simplicity point of view) is that you are trusting to luck, not game mechanics.

You can't count ability scores. I could've sworn I got through to you when we spoke and got you to figure it out.

Its not about 'getting through' to anyone - its about the facts.

When all else fails, though . . . I got one last thing to suggest . . .

PLAYTEST IT. Playtest NOT using the ability scores to determine CR. Playtest it and you'll see that EVERYTHING comes out correct. Stop guessing, I've already playtested this idea and seen it. Now you do the same. Actually PLAY A GAME and don't use the ability scores to determine anything. PLAY IT. Heck, without counting ability scores, you finally fix the low level problem. If you DO count the ability scores, you SEVERELY overestimate Level 1-3 characters, because they can be "an equal challenge as an ogre" which anyone with any common sense can tell you is utterly INSANE.

Anyway, playtest it. I dare you. You'll see my numbers work, just as they do for me.

Lets compare and contrast a 1st-level character with all 18s and a 5th-level character with all 10s.

Armour Class ~ 1st-level character is higher.
Attack Bonus ~ Same for Fighter Types*, otherwise 1st-level character is higher.
Damage ~ 1st-level character is higher (approx. double)
Saves ~ 1st-level character is higher
DCs ~ 1st-level character is higher
Ability Checks ~ 1st-level character is higher
Skills ~ On average the same
Hit Points ~ 5th-level character is higher (approx. double)
Class Features ~ 5th-level character is higher
Equipment ~ 5th-level character has better

*Provided you are not using a composite bow

So its pretty clear that ability scores do have a significant impact.

 

[Anubis]

Lets compare and contrast a 1st-level character with all 18s and a 5th-level character with all 10s.

Yes, let's! This is where you lose the argument! For the sake of simplicity, let's compare fighters here.

Armour Class ~ 1st-level character is higher.

Wrong. Level 1 MIGHT have a 21 AC. The Level 5 character will have Full Plate and a Large Steel Shield will have AT LEAST AC 20, most likely 21 or 22.

Attack Bonus ~ Same for Fighter Types*, otherwise 1st-level character is higher.

You forgot to factor in magical weapons here.

Damage ~ 1st-level character is higher (approx. double)

Slightly. This one you get.

Saves ~ 1st-level character is higher

Only if you bump up the cost of the Cloak of Resistance.

DCs ~ 1st-level character is higher

The Level 5, if a spellcaster, will have better spells.

Ability Checks ~ 1st-level character is higher

Not a big deal, these rarely come into play AT ALL.

Skills ~ On average the same

This depends on too many factors to make such a claim.

Hit Points ~ 5th-level character is higher (approx. double)

It'll be a bit more than double.

Class Features ~ 5th-level character is higher

Correct. This is the biggest factor right here.

Equipment ~ 5th-level character has better

This is the second biggest factor.

So its pretty clear that ability scores do have a significant impact.

Actually, the opposite is true. The Level 5 character would win EVERY TIME. NO EXCEPTIONS. By your system, they should be 50/50. NO WAY. I would bet my checking account on this.

You still have yet to address the ogre situation. Since you're tyring to build a system that works at ALL levels, that includes levels 1-3. This system does NOT work at levels 1-3, as proven by the CR 3 ogre. Heck, a Level 1 character with 18 in every score will not even beat an ogre UNLESS it's a Wizard or Sorcerer that gets real lucky with the sleep spell.

 

[Clay_More]

On from the skills to the ability scores....

Anyways, I am still pondering (& thinking) about the aspect of undead deities (Ie. deities that arent merely supportive of undead, like Orcus, Wee Jas, Vecna, but Undead themselves). Will you include some explanation of how the aspect of undead deities work?
I have always figured that gods are outsiders, made of energy or something similar. Since outsiders have problems becomming undead, gods would have even greater problems. Mainly, I would think that their energy wouldn't be able of being affected by Negative Energy. Thats just IMO off course

Im definitely going to be at Gencon UK, perhaps only 3 days, but still. Hope to hook up with ya (and who-ever is going there as well). They should make a special Enworld café or something there (should be enough Enworlders at the convention to make it plausible)...