Thank you!Rockhoward56 said:yop!
After re-reading the bestiary (which is very great )
I appreciate the errata. Wherer were you a few weeks ago when I was finishing the print version!?Rockhoward56 said:i've some questions:
His Armor Class :83 but (9 deflection+5 Dex+6 Divine+51 (epic bracers)+8 natural armor)=79
Attack: +71 but(35 base+18 sword bonus+9For+6Divine+1 epic prowess=69)
I think of all the monsters in the Bestiary the Nexus Dragon's Challenge Rating is the most likely to be wrong.Rockhoward56 said:HOWWWWWWW KILLLLLLLL the NEXus dragon , for me this monster ( before Ascension release , his invicible )
Basically I designed a golem made of Neutronium and then worked out its Challenge Rating, I wasn't trying to design a monster with a 9721 CR.Rockhoward56 said:I think the Neutronium Golem , base attack bonus , accretion check , Saves, Gravic Aura and disintegration check are too low for a 9721 uber monster)
why not using the math for a 2500d100 monster? woild be more accurate maybe?
Off the top of my head I would probably say that the Sadim would need to eat wealth to retain its Breath Weapon...in the same sort of way a Dracolich has still eat to maintain its.dante58701 said:If a sadim stopped being greedy, what adjustments would have to be made to it? The reason I ask is a player in my campaign is playing a sadim, who through devastating tragedy, cast aside all his wealth. Would it retain all of its abilities or would some change? And if they did change, what would they change to?
Yes.Pssthpok said:Hey, UK. Question for you.
You make mention of abilities like Infinite Strength and such. My question is in comparing such scores. Does a character with Infinite Strength deal infinite damage?
I think thats the simplest way to do it.Pssthpok said:This seems obvious, but does a charater with Infinite Constitution, when struck by a character with Infinite Strength, just cancel out the two infinities and take 'normal' damage, or is there a more complicated mechanic in place?
I suppose I could just wait a week or two, but I figured I'd ask.
I hope to sneak the text version out for the first week of July. *Fingers Crossed*Ltheb Silverfrond said:Joking aside, U_K, do you think you will still meet the posted date on enworld for the release? (July 4?) (I should know better than to ask by now, just curious)
Any or all of the above would be great.As for another preview page, I may add the second page of contents/glossary tomorrow and then another page on Monday.
I sort of wanted to preview the Divine Hierarchy table at the start of the second chapter. The problem being that the top half of that page should have an illustration on it, which I haven't finished yet.
My candid preference would be for the former primarily because I see it being easier on the reader.One thing I have been worrying about with the Powers chapter is whether or not I should have:
- Epic Feats Table - Epic Feat descriptions - Divine Ability Table - Divine Ability Descriptions - Cosmic Ability Table - Cosmic Ability Descriptions - Transcendental Ability Table - Transcendental Ability Descriptions - Omnific Ability Table - Omnific Ability Descriptions.
- Epic Feats Table - Divine Ability Table - Cosmic Ability Table - Transcendental Ability Table - Omnific Ability Table - Epic Feat descriptions - Divine Ability Descriptions - Cosmic Ability Descriptions - Transcendental Ability Descriptions - Omnific Ability Descriptions.
Incidently the Tables take up about 9 1/2 pages* (or 13 1/2 counting the Feat Packages Table).
I seem to recall that Deities and Demigods had separate tables for the feats and the SDAs, and Complete Warrior having seperate tables for the different types of feats. So I'd say, separate tables have a good precedence.historian said:My candid preference would be for the former primarily because I see it being easier on the reader.
Don't scare me with talk of bookmarks. The index is going to be enough of a nightmare*.Ltheb Silverfrond said:Well, your having a need to have 5 different tables is unique. The individual tables in each section are easier to reference, while a large table would look more comprehensive. I think if the table are to be all together, they should be condensed into one table (If this works out) and possibly with page number references (or we can just wait till the IH is done and a Bookmarked version is finished (Doesnt that sound like a fun job ).
Not exactly.Ltheb Silverfrond said:Oh, the feat packages, are they just a quick way of assigning feats to deities based on bonus feat progressions? Like if I make a level 96 Deity, with 33 bonus feats, are the feat packages just "You get x feat y times, z feat n times, q feat l times, and feats e r b & p" ? I like the idea, and sadly whenever I go to stat up epic monsters, I end up giving them all the sane similar feat package (A nasty one too, the most abusive feats possible. If I recall, a Hecontoncheires with Multitasking...) My player group assigns the "ad-hoc-dm-power-gamed-this-monster-CR-adjustment" to anything I make
If you've got 'em, cross em'.Ltheb Silverfrond said:As for a July release... Fingers *And* Toes crossed.
Upper_Krust said:Also regarding the Divine Retinue ideas I was sceptical on a day or two ago, nevermind, I did some more testing and found that the trick lies in judging the immortals divine age.
That would make sense though. Even when talking about low-rank deities, it would make more sense that a one who has been around for thousands of year would have gathered more followers than one who just gained divinity an hour ago... Even for no other reason that his mortal followers throughout the centuries would have died and joined him (if mortal followers of a deity join that deity upon their death in your setting - many earth mythologies have them go to a specific plane such as Valhalla or Hades...)CRGreathouse said:
Does older mean more followers/subcohorts? Regardless of what "power level" of retinue you have for a particular deity, the rules for determining their levels still needs to be determined.