Immortals Handbook - Epic Bestiary (Epic Monster Discussion)

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Ltheb mate!

Snide comments aside, U_K is probably right on his math, even if forcing one of your artifacts to be a Cloak of Resistance is undesirable. Assuming the PC and the Monster have equal HD/stats/save/ability boosts, the PC should always need an "8" to save if his or her High save is targeted, or a "14" if it's a low save. Now, as the monster gains more HD, and subsequently more feats and ability ups, the gulf becomes impossible to overcome without powergaming your saves to extreme levels. (and even then there is still a point of no return) (If the monster has 38 more HD that the character, the save should be impossible to make, sans a '20')

Its pretty clear that the potentially infinite approach to ability scores, saves and DCs is something of a pandora's box.

Which was what made me return to the 1st-Ed approach, in the alternative, optional saving throw progression I touted a few months back.

Whereby epic characters always save on a '3' and deities would always save on a '2' modified by divine rank (with 1 always a failure).

e.g. An epic fighter would save on a '7' or better against an abomination (quasi-deity; DvR +4), a demigod (DvR +6) would save on an '11' or better against a greater deity (DvR +16).

What you could perhaps add, are an additional modifier whereby portfolios add +50% (single) or +100% (double) DVR in these instances.

So the Amilictli might be treated as a demigod for the purposes of saves against its electrical/storm-based effects.

Now, aside from a cloak of resistance (which greatly helps the situation, to the point where the character always saves, except on a '1'), what can be done? Divine powers that let a PC add X more desirable attribute to their saves help greatly initially, but probably don't contribute much in the long run. (How long, I don't know... PCs still only get so many attribute ups, and Stat-boosting items are 1/2 as effective as the resistance bonus) And the Divine rank bonus swings both ways. (and favors the higher-level divine opposition)

Exactly, you are ultimately fihting a losing battle even with Cloaks of Resistance.

When playing a character, especially in an epic environment, it is more important to horde immunities than boosting saves. It doesn't matter if your save bonus is 1000 higher than the DC for the Staff of Death's Finger of Death power if a Hecatoncheires points 57 of them at you. (Statistically you have about a 5% chance of Living due to absolute 1 / 20 roll rules on saves) Absolute immunities are trumped by deities portfolios, so I would think a simple plan of action would be to just keep non-artifact magic items on a PC that grant all of the immunities available (death ward/mindblank/Freedom of movement/etc) because a deity is going to nullify them against you anyway with Anti-magic.

This sort of approach creates its own problems though, inflation of immunities renders so, so many feats, abilities and items useless, that basically everything will boil down to 'divine blast' type effects (unless you have the apropriate portfolio).

So unless you are specifically fighting a deity with the appropriate portfolio, those items might just prove useful, at least for the 1 action the deity wastes releasing anti-magic.

Well Anti-magic won't work on epic items.

I'd rather not see special ability saves reduced in DC to 20 + modifiers. That renders abilities into two catagories: Spammed-insta-kills, and Wasted Actions.

See the above alternate saving throw mechanic suggestion.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey paradox matey!

long post...

That assumes the PCs aren't immune to the "die" part in the first place,

Which would be a situational modifier to the EL and in many respects cheapen the monster which is why I generally tend to create my monsters to overcome immunities.

never a safe assumption at Epic level- and further assumes the monster lives long enough to get off that many attempts. In my experience, battles against opponents of less than, say, CR one-and-a-half times the average party level end in one or two rounds, one way or the other. Parties at these levels can dish out such enormous damage, including ability damage and energy drains to help other effects along, that monsters of a CR less than that just don't last longer than a round or two (unless they manage to retreat somehow).

Yes, but when you say 'average' party level, do you mean your average party level of powergamers, or the averge party level of the majority of gamers out there?

It isn't the basic class abilities and spells that deal this damage, mind you; it's the combinations of super-powerful effects which build on each other synergistically to produce combos of incredible might. The Time Stop cascades I mentioned in my previous post, available only when two PC spellcasters have both the spell and the Spell Stowaway feat for it, is but one example. One spellcaster with both can't produce a cascade- only two PCs working together can.

I'm all for that though, my pet hate is immunities.

To be quite precise, the chance is closer to 14% rather than 15%, since simple addition of the chances gives an incorrect result- but you are correct in the basic conclusion. However, you in turn need to remember that a monster with multiple such abilities will typically have many if not most of those abilities negated by PC items or buffs granting immunities. This, then, reduces it to the monster having only a few tricks it can use to do real harm- and if that harm can be negated 95% of the time by the player rolling a die, then it is essentially a wasted ability. Not quite negated, but close enough not to matter in a halfway-decent battle plan.

Which is why you should always try and think of ways for epic monsters to overcome (or partially overcome) immunities.

No, it is not! You completely ignored the core of my argument, which was that if the monster spent an action to use the ability, then the action is wasted. Whether that is the monster's sole means of attack is completely irrelevant- the only relevant fact is that the monster, by using the attack that the PC saved against and thus negated, spent an action which had no effect. And to restate/paraphrase the principle I articulated in that last post, "he who wastes the least actions, wins." It's like making a bad move in a chess match- it may or may not immediately cost you the game, but you'll sure as Hells wish you'd made a different move when the canny opponent takes advantage of your mistake and doesn't make one of his own.

I didn't ignore your argument, I just disagree with it.

If a monster tries a special ability that has a save or die type effect which has a 25% chance of success, then statistically on average thats better than engaging in melee whereby you deal an average 20% damage to a given target.

Perhaps, but in whatever thought process you are using to do so, you are ignoring the most important part of the big picture. You're the one who appreciates simplicity, so consider it this way: ultimately, nothing matters except that the monster not waste its actions. If it spends an action to use an ability and that ability has no significant effect, then the action was wasted. Therefore, using an ability which has an extremely high chance (like, say, 90% or higher) of not working, is an advance-waste of an action, and not worth doing unless the monster literally has no other option available to it.

The key is what constitutes a wasted action though. In your mind a wasted action is when nothing happens, but statistically speaking that may not be a waste.

Irrelevant. The only case where your fact becomes relevant to the "do not waste actions" rule, is when one or more of those multiple abilities you're talking about are constant abilities rather than activated. Constant abilities do not require actions to use, and therefore do not trip the "do not waste actions" rule. Any other ability, simply because it requires activation, by definition within the game system itself requires an action to use. The type of action doesn't matter as much as the fact that it requires one in the first place. Free actions sort of get around this problem by being an inexhaustible resource, even within a single round, but abilities which are activated as free actions (as opposed to, say, swift or immediate, which are one-per-round only) are few and far between.

I'll state again. A 25% chance of killing someone dead is better than dealing 20% damage per round.

The immunities come into play anyway in Epic, particularly if you have players with any inclination whatsoever to min/maxing or powergaming. But you are correct; making a situation where the PCs are almost certainly doomed to failure has its own down sides. The question then becomes: if we must choose between nearly-automatic-success and nearly-automatic-failure, which to choose? Or is there somehow a way allowing us to avoid that unpleasant choice?

For me the obvious answer is that near auto success is superior, however, see my alternative saving throw rules posted earlier today.

Agreed, but the down side of having a seriously powergamed PC in a party where not every character is so powergamed is that the powergamed PC becomes capable of overshadowing everybody else. A balance must be maintained. Fortunately, my Epic party has gotten around this by evolving in such a manner that the non-powergamed characters have their own niches in the party that none of the real powergame characters can touch- for example, the party Bard (yes, the party has a single-classed Bard at 32nd level) is the negotiator, and the one who always, always, always makes the skill checks for Diplomacy, or Information Gathering, or the like. The power-party members don't dare go shopping without her; even the Sorceress with her +16 to CHA for everybody within 30 feet Epic buff (or whatever the bonus is- I can't remember off the top of my head since everybody's just assumed it's active for most rolls for the last several months of real time) can't come close to touching a +60-odd modifier on Diplomacy checks.

Exactly, I think its less a case of a party where everyone is equal and more a case of a party where everyone can shine, that may not necessarily always be combat as you note.

Nice to know, and kudos for thinking about it- but it doesn't help the rest of us in the near term.

Yes but I do so love to tease people with this sort of stuff.

Ah yes, I remember now. And now I have to say: "ah, my kind of monster!"

Now that I mentioned the fact that the party's single-classed Bard is 32nd level, you perhaps have a better idea of exactly what I have been doing- since I really did throw an Orichalcum Guardian at them. It was given a serious disadvantage in being stuck on terrain that largely prevented it from moving, at the time, but even considering that- and even when I tell you the party has 7 PCs in it- compare the CRs here. The party used up almost everything they had to bring it down (The party Sorceress, for example, and her Eidolon with her, was left with no spell slots above 0th level at the end of the fight- literally tapped out completely), and almost didn't survive its death throes when they finally did.

I have to say, my highlight during the battle- other than nearly killing all but two PCs with the final Nuke (until the damn psionicist remembered his amulet- curses!), was when the Guardian fired a Plasma Beam at the party tank. He was protected by a Peripety-like effect that just bounced the beam back onto the Guardian, but boy oh boy did the players' faces go white when they saw how many dice I had the die-roller program make! Plus the final damage tally (some 3500-odd- it rolled slightly high), that was classic.

...and who says bigger numbers aren't necessarily fun!

I'll happily consider any such monster you design, but do keep in mind the numbers and situations I've given up above. Party Sorceress goes around constantly with her "Aura of Glory" which grants a high CHA bonus (I'm pretty sure it's higher than +16) to every ally within 30 feet, she also goes around with an Eidolon that's nearly as powerful as she is, and she's even invented an Epic spell using the Ward seed that stops specific nasty effects like Blasphemy (the only one she's actually set it to so far) and then uses the energy to slap the effect's caster with damage. The party tank (the player with the double-major degree) is the one with a Greatsword that's been imbued with, among other things, the ability to use Giant Size on the character 3 times per day- and has piled so many carefully-chosen magic items of various types on himself that his touch AC is in the high 40s. Oh, and I almost forgot to mention, the Sorceress is actually a Mystic Theurge with Druid, too. She has access to 5th-level Divine spells in addition to her extreme Arcane nastiness, if my memory serves.

And there are five other characters in this party, all of them partially min-maxed thanks to the efforts of the above two players- to say nothing of the efforts of the other five players, two of whom are also powergamers to a significant degree (just, not as significant as the primary two). The party ranges in level from 30th (the psionic item-crafter whose amulet saved the party's collective hide from the Nuke) to 33rd (the tank and the Sorceress, after the most recent adventure). And actually I have to grant an XP award for finishing up a major plot arc in the next session, so the lower-level members of the group are likely to be catching up slightly.

They'll enjoy some of the stuff you will unleash in Gods & Monsters, especially the Drakainai, Gigantes and Titans...you'll be in 'Hog Heaven'.

Happy to do it, particularly since you don't have your copy yet! Seriously, that's just wrong, that we got our copies before the author of the freakin' book did!

I have waited this long I can wait another week or two.

Fair enough. Thanks for the notes here at least. That's probably worth putting into an errata file if you make one, and in any case you should try to make room for it in future Bestiary supplements when you show more such dragons. The up side there is, when you get around to those, Ascension should be complete and even in stores, in print form. So you can then refer to the appropriate powers directly by name, with confidence that people using the Bestiary will know what you're talking about (or at least have an idea where to go to learn).

Now, I need to start thinking about what sorts of Adamic and Nehasch- ah, damn, I hate spelling that word, you know what I mean - Dragons to make for myself.

Well I only have half the dragons decided for future Bestiary Volumes, so if there is anything in particular you want me to look at let me know.

Gods & Monsters: Lunar (adamic) & Doom/Barbarian (epic)

Bestiary #2: Quasar (Nehaschimic).

Not sure what other adamic dragon to do for #2...I was always thinking perhaps the Planetary/Gravitic Dragon was based upon King Ghidorah (from the Godzilla movies) - so I am not sure I want to get too close to that.

Achromatic/Rogue (Epic).

Which means in some order I am missing the Bard, Monk and Psion based Dragons. I was only planning on two epic dragons (plus one adamic and one nehaschimic) per future volume...although thats not necessarily set in stone.

Bestiary #3: Black Hole (Nehaschimic).

 

[paradox42]

long post...

Answering long arguments point-by-point and going back and forth that way tends to produce such. Nature of the medium.

Yes, but when you say 'average' party level, do you mean your average party level of powergamers, or the averge party level of the majority of gamers out there?

What I mean is the average party level of the games I've run at around 20th level and higher. My current Epic game is by far the longest game I've ever run- it's been going from 1st level to now, over 6 years of real time (we just had a true anniversary game- since the dates for 2007 Saturdays exactly match those from 2001- in April), but it's not by any means the only one I've been running under 3.X rules. I've had several side games, and I include my experience from those games with the Epic game (which is, of course, slightly over-the-top- but if you up the average PC level of a group of "regular" gamers by about 5 or 6 I'm convinced you'll see similar numbers).

I'm all for that though, my pet hate is immunities.

...

Which is why you should always try and think of ways for epic monsters to overcome (or partially overcome) immunities.

I've long considered using the rule you suggested some years ago, that energy immunities constitute a Resistance of 50 in most cases, and a blanket immunity like Death Ward just translates to a massive save bonus. The trouble is when to make the transition happen in-game, since the game doesn't just stop.

I didn't ignore your argument, I just disagree with it.

If a monster tries a special ability that has a save or die type effect which has a 25% chance of success, then statistically on average thats better than engaging in melee whereby you deal an average 20% damage to a given target.

I agree with that argument; however, we aren't talking about that. Or at least *I* wasn't. I was talking about the monster having a choice between melee and a save-or-die effect that has only a 5% chance of working because the character saves on anything but a nat1. Unless the monster can use it six times on the same target in a single round by spending one action, the melee attack is better, hands-down.

The key is what constitutes a wasted action though. In your mind a wasted action is when nothing happens, but statistically speaking that may not be a waste.

If you force the PCs to "waste" actions of their own countering yours, then no, it is not a waste, it is a strategic move. But I covered that in my first post on this topic; typically actions which produce results like this are negated by buffs the PCs used outside of combat (where the "don't waste actions" rule doesn't apply). If you can get rid of their original layer of buffs and force them to buff during combat, then that becomes a good trade-off for you, which is why using a Dispel or Disjunction is sometimes a worthwhile action.

Usually though, if you use an ability and it has no effect, then the action spent to use the ability was wasted.

For me the obvious answer is that near auto success is superior, however, see my alternative saving throw rules posted earlier today.

I always hated the fact that saves go down to using the same number in 1st Edition. I far prefer the DC mechanic, it feels more dramatic to me. Your suggestion about changing save DC calculations to 20 + mods that sparked this whole massive-post war does essentially the same thing in reverse, which is probably why it rubbed me so much the wrong way.

Exactly, I think its less a case of a party where everyone is equal and more a case of a party where everyone can shine, that may not necessarily always be combat as you note.

Of course. However, I will note that the powergamers haven't always gamed their PCs for combat; as I said above I've run many other games- and those two have been in those side games off and on over the years. I've seen characters optimized for Diplomacy or item crafting like you wouldn't believe. And I'll mention that the double-major guy is the one running Equinox, the character in my current side game who got two DR by making a Deal; what he did with that character before the divinity came into the mix was actually enough to force two other players to make new characters because their original "niches" were suddenly overshadowed by Equinox who was doing it better. Like I said, he's out to "win."

...and who says bigger numbers aren't necessarily fun!

Certainly not me. I'm the one who gave the PCs enough toys to take out an Orichalcum Guardian at level 30 in the first place. In pursuit of another toy, for that matter. Admittedly they were doing it at the direction of the party tank's god (whom they've met in person several times of course), and who will eventually be demanding that they give him the artifact they went to such trouble to acquire- since he's the one who told them what it was, where it was, how it would help them, and how to use it.

They'll enjoy some of the stuff you will unleash in Gods & Monsters, especially the Drakainai, Gigantes and Titans...you'll be in 'Hog Heaven'.

By the time it comes out they'll probably be 40th. So it'll depend on just how powerful those monsters are.

Well I only have half the dragons decided for future Bestiary Volumes, so if there is anything in particular you want me to look at let me know.

Gods & Monsters: Lunar (adamic) & Doom/Barbarian (epic)

Bestiary #2: Quasar (Nehaschimic).

Not sure what other adamic dragon to do for #2...I was always thinking perhaps the Planetary/Gravitic Dragon was based upon King Ghidorah (from the Godzilla movies) - so I am not sure I want to get too close to that.

Is the intended theme that the Adamic/Cosmic Dragons mirror basic forces of nature in some way, so for example, the Planetary is Gravity, Cometary is Time, and something else is Electromagnetic? Strong Force and Weak Force would be strange to contemplate game effects for, but probably possible to come up with something cool for anyway. Of course, that doesn't leave enough dragons for the list you already noted in Bestiary I.

The Transcendental Dragons- the "tapeworms in the body of the Demiurge"- seem to be based on extreme warps in spacetime. That doesn't leave a lot of options, unless we break theme and/or expand it slightly.

Ideas I'm toying with include a Quark Dragon, a Superstring Dragon, "Superposition Particles" Dragon, and a Brane Dragon (brane in the sense of current string theory/M-theory that is). Of those, the only obvious Neh-whatever Dragon is the Brane Dragon; that pretty much has to be extra-universal to work (actually it may be a specially-shaped Time Lord). What "tier" do you suppose the others might be?

Achromatic/Rogue (Epic).

Which means in some order I am missing the Bard, Monk and Psion based Dragons. I was only planning on two epic dragons (plus one adamic and one nehaschimic) per future volume...although thats not necessarily set in stone.

Bestiary #3: Black Hole (Nehaschimic).

Really, just saying "Black Hole Dragon" is cool. Enough to put the fear o' Overgods into any player's heart.

And as for the class-based Epic Dragons, there are considerably more classes to base on these days than just the ones you've listed- for example, what about a Warlock Dragon? Or a Binder Dragon (Binder being from the Tome of Magic)? I could go on, but you get the idea. Some of the "new classes" clearly fall so close to old ones that they don't really "deserve" dragons of their own, but others are pretty "out there" and do deserve such treatment.

And as for the Bard Dragon, didn't somebody on these boards some time ago stat up a version, which name escapes me right now? It may have been one of the old Bestiary threads before Morrus gave you your own forum.

 

[Pssthpok]

Hey hey, UK!

Yes but thats meta-gaming, not gaming. It just smacks of bad design to force people to play a certain way.

Yeah, but if 9 out of 10 players tend to wear them anyway, it's not in your hands and DC issues settle down a bit.

Exactly for a meta-gaming reason.

Which is a player-based issue, not a DM-based one. If the players tend to wear a CoR then your DC problems, in terms of formulae, loose a lot of the head they might present in a game where they wear, I dunno... Cape of the Montebank or whatever.
Seriously, everyone... honestly, post whether you'd have a player character not wear a cloak of resistance in the current rulesset, in favor of something else.
If the majority tend to agree that they are staple items, well I don't see that as a DM's problem.

They'll complain when they only get 3 artifacts + cloak of resistance.

Not if they were going in that direction in the first place. What you're suggesting is that we overhaul the DC determination system solely so players have more item versatility? Well, odds are they'll stick to CoRs and run the new save DCs into the ground.

They are basically a band aid on a flawed DC mechanic.

So, is magic armor a band-aid to a flawed combat system? Magic weapons? Those and the CoRs are all options that grows more attractive as the level of power goes up, but not necessarily because anything is flawed. I mean if you're going to play in the street, you put your shoes on.

It alleviates some of the fuss if we force players to use such an item at maximum capacity.

I doubt very highly that PCs grudge the idea of using a CoR under a standard setting environment.
"Survive more often?"
"Sure!"
Does that make DCs a flawed system? Only if Toughness proves that damage rates are too high.

Changing CR just to accomodate DCs is not the answer, certainly not the most economical answer.

It is when you're designing the only monsters of a certain range of power and finding that the ability scores you gave them in conjunction with the hit dice you gave them making their DCs too high, you have two options: fix your design parameters or overhaul an integral part of the whole system. Which is economical again?

Okay guys, two wrongs don't make a right you know.

Yeeeeah, but the majority tends to.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hiya mate!

Answering long arguments point-by-point and going back and forth that way tends to produce such. Nature of the medium.

It wasn't a complaint...I love these discussions.

What I mean is the average party level of the games I've run at around 20th level and higher. My current Epic game is by far the longest game I've ever run- it's been going from 1st level to now, over 6 years of real time (we just had a true anniversary game- since the dates for 2007 Saturdays exactly match those from 2001- in April),

Congratulations.

but it's not by any means the only one I've been running under 3.X rules. I've had several side games, and I include my experience from those games with the Epic game (which is, of course, slightly over-the-top- but if you up the average PC level of a group of "regular" gamers by about 5 or 6 I'm convinced you'll see similar numbers).

I wasn't overtly disagreeing with you in the first place, even though you are sort of a special case.

I've long considered using the rule you suggested some years ago, that energy immunities constitute a Resistance of 50 in most cases, and a blanket immunity like Death Ward just translates to a massive save bonus. The trouble is when to make the transition happen in-game, since the game doesn't just stop.

Its the sort of deep rooted issue that probably needs built into the system from the ground up (ie. in 4th Edition).

I agree with that argument; however, we aren't talking about that. Or at least *I* wasn't. I was talking about the monster having a choice between melee and a save-or-die effect that has only a 5% chance of working because the character saves on anything but a nat1. Unless the monster can use it six times on the same target in a single round by spending one action, the melee attack is better, hands-down.

Unless the melee attack would deal 4%.

If you force the PCs to "waste" actions of their own countering yours, then no, it is not a waste, it is a strategic move. But I covered that in my first post on this topic; typically actions which produce results like this are negated by buffs the PCs used outside of combat (where the "don't waste actions" rule doesn't apply). If you can get rid of their original layer of buffs and force them to buff during combat, then that becomes a good trade-off for you, which is why using a Dispel or Disjunction is sometimes a worthwhile action.

Usually though, if you use an ability and it has no effect, then the action spent to use the ability was wasted.

Which is almost exclusively why epic monsters with save inducing special abilities will be able to use other abilities at the same time.

I always hated the fact that saves go down to using the same number in 1st Edition. I far prefer the DC mechanic, it feels more dramatic to me. Your suggestion about changing save DC calculations to 20 + mods that sparked this whole massive-post war does essentially the same thing in reverse, which is probably why it rubbed me so much the wrong way.

When I was playing 1st/2nd Ed. I always wanted an open-ended ability score, save DC mechanic. But now that we have that I do see the problems attached to it.

Of course. However, I will note that the powergamers haven't always gamed their PCs for combat; as I said above I've run many other games- and those two have been in those side games off and on over the years. I've seen characters optimized for Diplomacy or item crafting like you wouldn't believe. And I'll mention that the double-major guy is the one running Equinox, the character in my current side game who got two DR by making a Deal; what he did with that character before the divinity came into the mix was actually enough to force two other players to make new characters because their original "niches" were suddenly overshadowed by Equinox who was doing it better. Like I said, he's out to "win."

Reminds me of my youth.

Certainly not me. I'm the one who gave the PCs enough toys to take out an Orichalcum Guardian at level 30 in the first place. In pursuit of another toy, for that matter. Admittedly they were doing it at the direction of the party tank's god (whom they've met in person several times of course), and who will eventually be demanding that they give him the artifact they went to such trouble to acquire- since he's the one who told them what it was, where it was, how it would help them, and how to use it.

Don't worry, together we CAN kill your PCs.

By the time it comes out they'll probably be 40th. So it'll depend on just how powerful those monsters are.

I think there'll be something for everyone...the Drakainai are about Lesser power type powerful, the Gigantes Intermediate type powerful and the Titans are Greater God type powerful.

All of the above are scalable to a degree.

Is the intended theme that the Adamic/Cosmic Dragons mirror basic forces of nature in some way, so for example, the Planetary is Gravity, Cometary is Time, and something else is Electromagnetic? Strong Force and Weak Force would be strange to contemplate game effects for, but probably possible to come up with something cool for anyway.

No, they are based on the dimensions.

Of course, that doesn't leave enough dragons for the list you already noted in Bestiary I.

I must be missing someone.

The Transcendental Dragons- the "tapeworms in the body of the Demiurge"- seem to be based on extreme warps in spacetime. That doesn't leave a lot of options, unless we break theme and/or expand it slightly.

Yes, they do seem limited in that department.

Ideas I'm toying with include a Quark Dragon, a Superstring Dragon, "Superposition Particles" Dragon, and a Brane Dragon (brane in the sense of current string theory/M-theory that is). Of those, the only obvious Neh-whatever Dragon is the Brane Dragon; that pretty much has to be extra-universal to work (actually it may be a specially-shaped Time Lord). What "tier" do you suppose the others might be?

Superstring Dragon = Nehaschimic (possibly from a micro-universe).
Quantum (Superposition) Dragon = Adamic
Brane Dragon = Nehaschimic (connecting universes?)
Quark Dragon...I'll have to think about (somewhere between Adamic and Nehaschimic...they are strange like that Quarks).

I really like the sound of the Quantum and Brane Dragons...those could be interesting to flesh out.

Really, just saying "Black Hole Dragon" is cool. Enough to put the fear o' Overgods into any player's heart.

And as for the class-based Epic Dragons, there are considerably more classes to base on these days than just the ones you've listed- for example, what about a Warlock Dragon? Or a Binder Dragon (Binder being from the Tome of Magic)? I could go on, but you get the idea. Some of the "new classes" clearly fall so close to old ones that they don't really "deserve" dragons of their own, but others are pretty "out there" and do deserve such treatment.

Well feel free to have a crack at them. For me to detail such dragons I'd have to first own the books.

And as for the Bard Dragon, didn't somebody on these boards some time ago stat up a version, which name escapes me right now? It may have been one of the old Bestiary threads before Morrus gave you your own forum.

I think Fieari has one on wikipedia somewhere.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey hey, UK!

Howdy there!

Yeah, but if 9 out of 10 players tend to wear them anyway, it's not in your hands and DC issues settle down a bit.

Exactly, which is why I only make observations and comments here rather than actually change the Bestiary itself.

Which is a player-based issue, not a DM-based one. If the players tend to wear a CoR then your DC problems, in terms of formulae, loose a lot of the head they might present in a game where they wear, I dunno... Cape of the Montebank or whatever.
Seriously, everyone... honestly, post whether you'd have a player character not wear a cloak of resistance in the current rulesset, in favor of something else.
If the majority tend to agree that they are staple items, well I don't see that as a DM's problem.

They are only staple items because the mechanics require it, not for any roleplaying purpose.

Not if they were going in that direction in the first place. What you're suggesting is that we overhaul the DC determination system solely so players have more item versatility? Well, odds are they'll stick to CoRs and run the new save DCs into the ground.

I'm not necessarily overhauling anything, simply pointing out one problem you may encounter and a possible solution.

So, is magic armor a band-aid to a flawed combat system? Magic weapons?

No, because magic weapons and armour are synonymous with fantasy and mythology. There is potentially infinite variety of magic armour and magic weapon.

Cloaks of Resistance have no such hallowed place in fantasy or mythology. They do not have infinite variety.

Those and the CoRs are all options that grows more attractive as the level of power goes up, but not necessarily because anything is flawed. I mean if you're going to play in the street, you put your shoes on.

I doubt very highly that PCs grudge the idea of using a CoR under a standard setting environment.
"Survive more often?"
"Sure!"
Does that make DCs a flawed system? Only if Toughness proves that damage rates are too high.

You are putting the cart before the horse. They don't bear a grudge because its a necessity. As you yourself say, its like putting you shoes on to go play in the street. Its mundane in the extreme.

It is when you're designing the only monsters of a certain range of power and finding that the ability scores you gave them in conjunction with the hit dice you gave them making their DCs too high, you have two options: fix your design parameters or overhaul an integral part of the whole system. Which is economical again?

...and do we design with Cloaks of Resistance as integral into PC make-up's?

Yeeeeah, but the majority tends to.

I am sure safety in numbers helps them sleep at night.

 

[dante58701]

What's popular is not always right and what's right is not always popular.

Majority means nothing in such situations. If majority was always right, we would all be mindless drones and puppets, but we aren't are we?

Basically...poor argument.

Cloaks of resistance are the furthest thing from being a necessary item. I've done just fine without them in nearly every campaign I've been in.

I just use my noggin to get out of sticky situations, rather than rely upon some trite little trinket or doodad.

Come to think of it, the only things Ive found to be necessary are magical weapons, levels in monk, or spells. Even the simplest magic weapons give you just the edge you need against a dreaded beastie.

Spells are even more important.

Even Epic Level play just requires a little cleverness, as opposed to "Look mommy I've got a +20 cloak of Dire Tarrasque Resistance."

Use the terrain to your advantage, set up you precast spells, sneak up on the beastie, or find a nice dead magic zone to level the playing field.

Another option...run away until ur higher level. Not every encounter need be a loss or victory.

Running is good roleplaying, especially since it's much smarter than charging headlong into battle like a pea-brained tyrannosaur. Thats what the stupid orcs are for.

Another option, raise an army. Epic Level individuals tend to have armies and even kingdoms.
Have your army fight while you and the other gamers do whippits, then charge into the fray when the beastie is down and pretend like you killed it all by yourself.

In theory you get the experience for raising the army and using your resources to kill it.

In short...there's more than one way to skin a Tarrasque, it need not be a paltry cloak of resistance. The same applies to other beasties. Tarrasque is just an example.

I dont know about you, but if every character were running around with the same ensemble of magic items, Id start ripping up peoples character sheets.

 

[Ltheb Silverfrond]

Aww hell, if you just wanted to scare your PCs paradox42, then all you had to do was say so. Nothing says "fear of the overgods" like an Paradimensional Cyclopean Quantum Vampire.

As for the discussion: Since running epic games takes quite a bit of math and planning and weighting encounters, there are 2 things in my mind that stick out: Either the Epic Dungeon Crawl, or the Premeditated encounter.

In the epic dungeon crawl, a PC potentially could face any kind of threat, with near any kind of power, and thus needs to prepare for anything. Cloaks of Resistance and Rings of Total-Invulnerability should be #1 on the shopping list. (If you can't find a way to defend against an attack at that level, a way probably doesn't exist. Best defend against all the ones possible though) When the Epic Barbarian kicks in the Neutronium Door, who knows what kind of horror will lair on the other side? How will it attack? Unless the PCs can figure out right away a creatures' gimmick, a creature like an Astral Hydra can make short work of many characters.

In the Premeditated encounter, the PCs know clear from the get-go what they are facing and are generally given time before the adventure to prepare. Example: 4 Goodly epic heroes decide to sweep clean the 666 layers of the abyss. 100 scrolls of Holyword? Check. Rings of dimension lock to prevent banishment? Check. +9 Orcus-Bane Sword? Check. The PCs can adapt their defenses to their specific opponents. If you have to fight a Neutronium Golem, it's best to try to kill it in one hit. If you have to fight a GW Nexus Dragon, it's better to spam attacks. The foe will still have a few tricks, but nothing the PCs won't be ready for with their own.

There is no right or wrong equipment list at epic levels, but I think generally if you go in blind, you are just asking to get stomped. A Cloak of Resistance is a wise idea, but 4 well balanced and well played PCs, working together, can take on epic level Foes without a Cloak of Resistance. (Most players playing from low-levels to Epic should be skilled enough by then)

 

[Fieari]

I think Fieari has one on wikipedia somewhere.

You're probably thinking of the Divine Phoenix, which isn't exactly a dragon...

 

[dante58701]

Hey Krusty...if you love vampires, you'll love this. It has a plethora of ideas for vampires. Id give you my copy, but as it's a PDF...yeah...well you get the idea...not possible. LOL!!!

The Immortal: Vampires
By Ben Mowbray
www.ukg-publishing.co.uk | www.ultramyth.com