Immortal's Handbook continuation thread

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Anubis mate!

Yep!

Glad to hear it!

Yet if the PCs all had 10 in every score, you're saying they should receive four times the XP! Um, no. They party with 10 in everything should be able to have only a marginally tougher time, not a significantly more difficult.

As poilbrun also mentioned, ability scores have more of an impact on the outcome (EL) at low level than at any other time.

I must have missed that.

No harm done mate. Have a look at the sidebars in the pdf.

So you're saying only the natural scores count then?

Yes (this includes the permanent inherant and divine bonuses of course).

FOR MONSTERS. NOT for PCs. I have NEVER supported taking PC ability scores into account when assigning power levels and XP.

But you did support the fact that ability scores are relevant to Challenge Rating and since CR is inextricably linked to EL which in turn is linked to EXP we can deduce that ability scores will affect EXP (from both PC AND Monster perspectives).

That's not what I meant. Your system says to assign XP based on the "overall encounter level" of the entire encounter, and THAT screwed PCs out of XP. XP should be assigned PER MONSTER, using each single monster's EL.

I advocate that EXP is assigned on the encounter difficulty because it makes things much easier to officiate.

On that note, I would HIGHLY suggest changing some definitions so that yours do not collide with the core rules as they now do. I would keep EL as overall encounter level, only for a DM to determine challenge. You can't change CR any more than it already is, so just give what YOU call EL another name, such as ACR (Adjusted Challenge Rating) or EPR (Effective Power Rating). Then use EL ONLY for DM reference for challenges, while using single monster EPRs (formerly ELs) when determining XP. That way, your system takes full effect while not screwing PCs out of XP due to lumping everything together.

I'm happy the way things are now. The bottom line is that my Encounter Levels are correct and the official rules are incorrect. If anyone should change terminology it should be them!

Only your XP awarding is flawed on the mixed encounter thing. Other than that, I like it.

If you wish to change that rule by all means do.

However in certain circumstances it actually bestows more EXP since you total fractions which allows for creatures below EL -8 to increase the amount. Not that I advocate such.

Well I can easily do so.

Be careful of counting chickens...

You say ability scores go to the adjusted CR of a PC?

Yes I do.

What happens with monster PCs and the like? Their LEVEL needs to be adjusted upwards because of ability scores in most cases. Yet YOU would ALSO tax them twice by making them earn even less XP due to their ability scores being counted twice!

Not at all; the problem here is that you are factoring ability scores into ECL and then counting ability scores again for the PC.

However, I purposefully stated on several occasions in the pdf that Templates and the like don't include ability scores and that you should be careful of factoring an ability twice. I seem to recall this caveat is in semibold type on page 1 of the pdf and again mentioned in the appropriate sidebars when templates and so forth are mentioned.

For instance, take the ogre. An ogre PC gets Str +10, Dex -2, Con +4, Int -4, Cha -4. That's a total of ECL +0.4 for ability scores. Then we get +1 for 4 Giant HD, +0.5 for 5 natural armor, and +0.5 for being Large. So we have an over +2.4 ECL for ogre characters, which rounds to +2 ECL. Sounds fair. An ogre with one class level is character level 3 and so on and so forth. So far so good.

Now we get to his CR. His ability scores are worth 7.6, he has 3 character levels, and still gets +1 for Giant HD, +0.5 for natural armor, and +0.5 for being Large, bringing the total to 12.6! To make it worse, that also makes him UK EL (EPR/ACR, whatever you decide to change it to, which I hope you do) 15! I'm sorry, but that is WAY too much for an ogre with ONE class level. Not only that, you are indeed double-taxing EVERYTHING. It's all in the ECL to begin with, and then it gets added AGAIN for CR!

How do you intend to correct this?

I don't need to; you jumped to a flawed assumption (as with the previous post). I have stated on many occasions that you don't calculate an ability twice.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Re: Re: Immortals Handbook FAQ

Hiya !

Konnichi wa tomodachi Gez!

I've read the FAQ, and there's one thing that bugs me...

I know its not the Vermiurge?

... I have bought Deities & Demigods, but not the ELH...

Well; Deities & Demigods is still all relevant and compatible.

However obviously I need access to Epic Feats to detail high-level characters properly. Likewise Epic Spells are similarly pertinent. Epic class progression, while obvious, is also still a factor.

Personally you could probably second guess most of the Epic Feats and as long as you weren't planning on creating too many Epic Spells I think you could get away without it.

That said the Epic Level Handbook is a much better book than Deities & Demigods! Not sure what other people herein who have both think?

 

[poilbrun]

Re: Re: Re: Immortals Handbook FAQ

That said the Epic Level Handbook is a much better book than Deities & Demigods! Not sure what other people herein who have both think?

Even though I have not actually used any of these two books yet (yesterday, I killed my girlfriend's 19th-level character!), I would say that the ELH is much better than D&Dg for one simple reason. I think about 90% of the ELH can be useful to me, whereas all D&Dg except the rules (and maybe the D&D pantheon, but then I mostly play in the FR or in a homebrew world) is useless since I REALLY do not agree with Wizards' vision of earth pantheons.

 

[Anubis]

As poilbrun also mentioned, ability scores have more of an impact on the outcome (EL) at low level than at any other time.

Maybe . . . I guess my real problem is how much math this entails . . . It would certainly slow down the game to calculate ALL this stuff . . .

You are, however, slowly winning me over on some points . . .

No harm done mate. Have a look at the sidebars in the pdf.

Was there also a sidebar where the rounding for CR is done to the nearest whole as well? I seem to recall something of that nature . . .

Yes (this includes the permanent inherant and divine bonuses of course).

I still have an issue with that. Inherent bonuses should be counted under the wealth limit instead, as the only truly effective way of getting such bonuses is with items.

But you did support the fact that ability scores are relevant to Challenge Rating and since CR is inextricably linked to EL which in turn is linked to EXP we can deduce that ability scores will affect EXP (from both PC AND Monster perspectives).

It makes me uneasy, though . . . I still think it might be, although more accurate, unnecessary as the change ONLY has a significant effect at low levels.

I advocate that EXP is assigned on the encounter difficulty because it makes things much easier to officiate.

I know that. You're still screwing PCs out of XP, though.

I'm happy the way things are now. The bottom line is that my Encounter Levels are correct and the official rules are incorrect. If anyone should change terminology it should be them!

You're missing the point. You have great ideas, but you are NOT WotC, and this IS their license. Therefore, you should accomidate ALL people looking at both systems with an unbiased eye. Besides, adding one term would cease any and all confusion. I know they're wrong, but that it is still their mistake to make. You, as the outsider designer, should mold your system AROUND their's without changing base terminology. Can you at least concede THAT point?

If you wish to change that rule by all means do.

I intend to. There's no reason why a gelugon should be worth less XP just because some pit fiends and a dragon are also in the battle.

However in certain circumstances it actually bestows more EXP since you total fractions which allows for creatures below EL -8 to increase the amount. Not that I advocate such.

Ah, but I assign XP for EVERYTHING. I simply extrapolate the table further down. If a Level 100 character wants to wipe out the entire population of New York City for 95 XP at the rate of 0.000047684 XP per person, he's more than welcome to do so.

Be careful of counting chickens...



Yes I do.



Not at all; the problem here is that you are factoring ability scores into ECL and then counting ability scores again for the PC.

Your PDF, however, does NOT cover ECL. That is something I have been bugging you about ever since. That's why I took it upon myself to figure it out.

However, I purposefully stated on several occasions in the pdf that Templates and the like don't include ability scores and that you should be careful of factoring an ability twice. I seem to recall this caveat is in semibold type on page 1 of the pdf and again mentioned in the appropriate sidebars when templates and so forth are mentioned.

For templates, not for things like ogre PCs. You never state ANYTHING about ECL for PCs in there.

I don't need to; you jumped to a flawed assumption (as with the previous post). I have stated on many occasions that you don't calculate an ability twice.

I think perhaps you see the problem and are trying to cover your ass. That's just fine, especially since you have basically stated the solution already.

Basically you're saying to calculate a PCs CR and ECL for a monster race SEPERATELY, no? In other words, a level 1 fighter ogre will be character level 3 due to ECL +2, but CR would only be the ogres CR 2.7 (3) plus the class level (1) for a CR 4 and an EL of 9. Do I now assume correctly?

Also, when could we get an updated PDF explaining how to do ECL and with your latest changes from the initial page of this thread?

 

[Gez]

I still have an issue with that. Inherent bonuses should be counted under the wealth limit instead, as the only truly effective way of getting such bonuses is with items.

Wizards with 25000 XP to spend in one minute are indeed a minority among characters, even after level 17.

In other words, a level 1 fighter ogre will be character level 3 due to ECL +2, but CR would only be the ogres CR 2.7 (3) plus the class level (1) for a CR 4 and an EL of 9. Do I now assume correctly?

*go fetch some asprin*

 

[Upper_Krust]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Immortals Handbook FAQ

Hi poilbrun mate!

Even though I have not actually used any of these two books yet (yesterday, I killed my girlfriend's 19th-level character!),

I'm sure Isabelle still loves you.

I would say that the ELH is much better than D&Dg for one simple reason. I think about 90% of the ELH can be useful to me, whereas all D&Dg except the rules (and maybe the D&D pantheon, but then I mostly play in the FR or in a homebrew world) is useless since I REALLY do not agree with Wizards' vision of earth pantheons.

The major flaw of Deities & Demigods was of course not providing accurate rules for Divine Ascension.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hello again Anubis mate!

Maybe . . . I guess my real problem is how much math this entails . . . It would certainly slow down the game to calculate ALL this stuff . . .

Much like any new system you have to allow for a period of acclimatisation.

For me its actually faster; but then again I am intimately familiar with it all.

You are, however, slowly winning me over on some points . . .

I knew that Charm Person scroll would one day prove useful.

Was there also a sidebar where the rounding for CR is done to the nearest whole as well? I seem to recall something of that nature . . .

Well, in the discussion over at Andy Collins Forums we determined that rounding factors to the nearest point was more prudent.

2.4 = 2
2.5 = 3
etc.

Also that determining abilities to 0.1 also helped.

I still have an issue with that. Inherent bonuses should be counted under the wealth limit instead, as the only truly effective way of getting such bonuses is with items.

Inherant Bonuses can also be gained through wishes. Personally I think its much more convenient to keep ALL inherant bonuses the same.

It makes me uneasy, though . . . I still think it might be, although more accurate, unnecessary as the change ONLY has a significant effect at low levels.

Yes but remember CR has a less significant effect on Encounter Level the higher we ascend.

I know that. You're still screwing PCs out of XP, though.

Actually I double checked my pdf and there is nothing that states you determine EXP in totality rather than individually.

Personally either way is valid; providing you stick to it from the onset.

You're missing the point. You have great ideas, but you are NOT WotC.

No doubt to their detriment.

and this IS their license.

It is an open gaming license lets not forget.

Therefore, you should accomidate ALL people looking at both systems with an unbiased eye.

I do. I accomodate the fact that their method is broken and mine is not. I have not at any juncture forced anyone to use my ideas (either peicemeal or in their totality) simply pointed out the official flaws and corrected them.

If people still want to use the official rules then I say good luck to them.

Besides, adding one term would cease any and all confusion. I know they're wrong, but that it is still their mistake to make. You, as the outsider designer, should mold your system AROUND their's without changing base terminology. Can you at least concede THAT point?

I see the point you are trying to make mate. However, terminology is critical (remember all the trouble the initial system got me into because it wasn't identical to the core rules, now; when I have everything right you are asking me to change things back again!?).

The bottom line is that I am simply following the mantra set out by the core rules regarding Challenge Rating (+1 Level = +1 CR) and Encounter Level (4x = x+4)*

*where x is Encounter Level of course.

The problem with the official rules is that they don't follow their own mantra.

I intend to. There's no reason why a gelugon should be worth less XP just because some pit fiends and a dragon are also in the battle.

I think the example was for Barbazu.

Ah, but I assign XP for EVERYTHING. I simply extrapolate the table further down. If a Level 100 character wants to wipe out the entire population of New York City for 95 XP at the rate of 0.000047684 XP per person, he's more than welcome to do so.

Your PDF, however, does NOT cover ECL. That is something I have been bugging you about ever since. That's why I took it upon myself to figure it out.

Well it does, but I understand you are refering to ECL affecting EXP progression - which I mentioned in Andy Collins Forums was something I would include in the final version.

For templates, not for things like ogre PCs. You never state ANYTHING about ECL for PCs in there.

Admittedly there is a caveat with regard ECL determination (which is almost* always equal to CR in my rules) in that ability score modifiers need to be determined seperately since normal characters don't automatically start with all 10's.

*Not counting things like Fast Healing/Regeneration.

I think perhaps you see the problem and are trying to cover your ass. That's just fine, especially since you have basically stated the solution already.

Easy tiger!

Basically you're saying to calculate a PCs CR and ECL for a monster race SEPERATELY, no? In other words, a level 1 fighter ogre will be character level 3 due to ECL +2, but CR would only be the ogres CR 2.7 (3) plus the class level (1) for a CR 4 and an EL of 9. Do I now assume correctly?

Ogres are CR 3 (remember Hit Dice would be +1.3)

Hit Dice +1.3
Size +0.5
Natural Armour +0.5
Ability Scores +0.7

But to determine Ogre ECL you need to first work out the ability score modifiers such a 'template' would add:

An Ogre is ECL 2.3 (ECL 2) not counting any ability score modifiers.

If we give it Str +4; Con +2; Dex -2; Wis -4; Cha -2 (Total -0.2 ECL)

Final tally ECL 2.1 (ECL 2)

Also, when could we get an updated PDF explaining how to do ECL and with your latest changes from the initial page of this thread?

I must admit I wasn't planning on creating another pdf until the Immortals Handbook is ready.

 

[Anubis]

I knew that Charm Person scroll would one day prove useful.

Well, in the discussion over at Andy Collins Forums we determined that rounding factors to the nearest point was more prudent.

2.4 = 2
2.5 = 3
etc.

Also that determining abilities to 0.1 also helped.

In other words, to the nearest whole. Got it. Sounds good.

Inherant Bonuses can also be gained through wishes. Personally I think its much more convenient to keep ALL inherant bonuses the same.

Isn't the XP and/or money cost more than enough to pay for those ability scores? Why tax things even further?

Yes but remember CR has a less significant effect on Encounter Level the higher we ascend.

Actually I double checked my pdf and there is nothing that states you determine EXP in totality rather than individually.

It's in the example with the gelugons, pit fiends, and red dragon. Turns out as EL 24.75 or something like that. It says to give XP based on the overall EL.

Personally either way is valid; providing you stick to it from the onset.

No doubt to their detriment.

It is an open gaming license lets not forget.

I do. I accomodate the fact that their method is broken and mine is not. I have not at any juncture forced anyone to use my ideas (either peicemeal or in their totality) simply pointed out the official flaws and corrected them.

If people still want to use the official rules then I say good luck to them.

What I'm saying is that you should keep all current definitions the same. Your EL is different than their EL. In the core rules, EL does NOT determine XP, it determines overall challenge. CR represents the level a party of four would need to defeat one such monster. You have an extra something in there to calculate XP directly that never was defined in the core rules, so give it your own definition!

I see the point you are trying to make mate. However, terminology is critical (remember all the trouble the initial system got me into because it wasn't identical to the core rules, now; when I have everything right you are asking me to change things back again!?).

The bottom line is that I am simply following the mantra set out by the core rules regarding Challenge Rating (+1 Level = +1 CR) and Encounter Level (4x = x+4)*

*where x is Encounter Level of course.

The problem with the official rules is that they don't follow their own mantra.

I think the example was for Barbazu.

I don't feel like looking it up. Either way, it was weak compared to the rest.

Well it does, but I understand you are refering to ECL affecting EXP progression - which I mentioned in Andy Collins Forums was something I would include in the final version.

Admittedly there is a caveat with regard ECL determination (which is almost* always equal to CR in my rules) in that ability score modifiers need to be determined seperately since normal characters don't automatically start with all 10's.

*Not counting things like Fast Healing/Regeneration.

Something like that.

Easy tiger!

Ogres are CR 3 (remember Hit Dice would be +1.3)

That's what I said. I didn't add fractions to the CR for HD, though. It comes out the same either way, 2.7 (rounded to 3) without the fraction for HD, 3.03 (rounded to 3) with adding the fraction. So should those HD fractions be counted?

Also, I still protest your NPC class ratings. I still say I had a good idea before. I did send that to you, I believe. After the first few levels, Warriors get +1/2, Commoners get 1/4, and the rest get 1/3. Playtesting supports this.

Hit Dice +1.3
Size +0.5
Natural Armour +0.5
Ability Scores +0.7

But to determine Ogre ECL you need to first work out the ability score modifiers such a 'template' would add:

An Ogre is ECL 2.3 (ECL 2) not counting any ability score modifiers.

If we give it Str +4; Con +2; Dex -2; Wis -4; Cha -2 (Total -0.2 ECL)

Final tally ECL 2.1 (ECL 2)

Ogres, by the rules, get Str +10, Dex -2, Con +4, Int -4, Cha -4. Remember, to find the bonus for high ability scores, subtract 10 from an even number or 11 from an odd number to get the modifier for monsters with classes. There is a table for penalties for things with low scores, but the subtract 10 from an even number and subtract 11 from an odd number works the same and gives the same results for the most part.

For the ECL, simply take the ability score modifiers and use your formula.

Ability Scores: +4 total, +0.4 ECL
HD: 4 Giant, +1.33 ECL
Natural Armor: +5, +0.5 ECL
Size: Large, +0.5 ECL
Total: +2.73 ECL (rounded to +3 ECL)

I must admit I wasn't planning on creating another pdf until the Immortals Handbook is ready.

Don't make me beg!

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Anubis mate!

In other words, to the nearest whole. Got it. Sounds good.

Yep.

Isn't the XP and/or money cost more than enough to pay for those ability scores? Why tax things even further?

If you were to remove the wealth the characters would still have the ability score bonuses; thats why they are calculated.

It's in the example with the gelugons, pit fiends, and red dragon. Turns out as EL 24.75 or something like that. It says to give XP based on the overall EL.

It says determine EL by totalling as shown, but not EXP for mixed opponents.

Thats another point I will have to clarify.

What I'm saying is that you should keep all current definitions the same. Your EL is different than their EL. In the core rules, EL does NOT determine XP, it determines overall challenge. CR represents the level a party of four would need to defeat one such monster. You have an extra something in there to calculate XP directly that never was defined in the core rules, so give it your own definition!

CR is still a measurement of a moderate opponent.

EL under my auspices adheres to the 4x = x+4.

You MUST determine EXP from Encounter Level; otherwise it doesn't make any sense at all.

Something like that.

That's what I said. I didn't add fractions to the CR for HD, though. It comes out the same either way, 2.7 (rounded to 3) without the fraction for HD, 3.03 (rounded to 3) with adding the fraction. So should those HD fractions be counted?

Yes. See I told you it was easy.

Also, I still protest your NPC class ratings. I still say I had a good idea before. I did send that to you, I believe. After the first few levels, Warriors get +1/2, Commoners get 1/4, and the rest get 1/3. Playtesting supports this.

I already told you in our email I prefered your measurement of the NPC classes - I just haven't got round to changing them yet.

Also the difference is so negligable anyway that I am not in any hurry.

Ogres, by the rules, get Str +10, Dex -2, Con +4, Int -4, Cha -4.

Where does it say that? I couldn't find it.

Remember, to find the bonus for high ability scores, subtract 10 from an even number or 11 from an odd number to get the modifier for monsters with classes. There is a table for penalties for things with low scores, but the subtract 10 from an even number and subtract 11 from an odd number works the same and gives the same results for the most part.

Just subtract 10 from all scores.

For the ECL, simply take the ability score modifiers and use your formula.

Ability Scores: +4 total, +0.4 ECL
HD: 4 Giant, +1.33 ECL
Natural Armor: +5, +0.5 ECL
Size: Large, +0.5 ECL
Total: +2.73 ECL (rounded to +3 ECL)

See how easy it is!

Don't make me beg!

It will be at the back of the IH.

 

[Knight Otu]

Where does it say that? I couldn't find it.

Monster Manual/SRD:

Ogre
Large Giant
Hit Dice: 4d8+8 (26 hp)
Initiative: -1 (Dex)
Speed: 30 ft.
AC: 16 (-1 size, -1 Dex, +5 natural, +3 hide)
Attacks: Huge greatclub +8 melee; or Huge longspear +1 ranged
Damage: Huge greatclub 2d6+7; or Huge longspear 2d6+5
Face/Reach: 5 ft. by 5 ft./10 ft. (15-20 ft. with longspear)
Saves: Fort +6, Ref +0, Will +1
Abilities: Str 21, Dex 8, Con 15, Int 6, Wis 10, Cha 7
Skills: Climb +4, Listen +2, Spot +2
Feats: Weapon Focus (greatclub)
Climate/Terrain: Any land, aquatic, and underground
Organization: Solitary, pair, gang (2-4), or band (5-8)
Challenge Rating: 2
Treasure: Standard
Alignment: Usually chaotic evil
Advancement: By character class