Immortals Handbook - Grimoire (Artifacts, Epic Magic discussion)

[Upper_Krust]

I'll throw in my two cents on what I think Kerrick's side is here- there may be worlds where the base assumption, that everything starts at 1st level and the number of people at each higher level is half the previous, doesn't hold. That assumption is a basis for the game's structure, but that structure is built around an assumed world which may not precisely match the one the characters are currently in. In other words, some worlds may have environmental factors (not necessarily having anything to do with magic) which actively reduce the number of low-level individuals and force things to a higher level average.

Dark Sun is a perfect example of this. The world was designed to be harsh and brutal in the extreme; characters must be tough to survive- and even then the attrition rate is quite high. Back in AD&D 2nd Edition, PCs rolled scores using 5d4 instead of 3d6, resulting in potential ranges 2 points higher than the standard (though forcing things to be average much more often as well, so not often resulting in stellar scores). In addition to that, PCs were started not at 1st level, but at 3rd; the rationale (as given in the setting rulebooks) was that the world was so harsh that 1st and 2nd level characters simply wouldn't have a reasonable chance to survive.

Now, 3rd Edition has a quicker level curve- characters really don't tend to spend very long at a given level compared to how long they spent at a level in earlier editions of the game. And in game time, if the campaign is run in what I've seen called the "24 style" (meaning, hardly any down time, the PCs are always doing something- refers to the style of the Fox TV series "24"), it's quite possible for PCs to go from 1st to 20th level in only a year or two. That said, yes, the game still seems to assume the averages you quoted for your numbers above- the number of people at a given level is assumed to be half that of the previous one. But what if we take a world like Dark Sun into account? If most of the 1st and 2nd level people simply die, and active adventurers are assumed to be at least 3rd, doesn't that mean that the number of 3rd-level characters is going to be higher than the number of 1st or 2nd level? The lower-level characters simply aren't around long enough to register in the count, one way or another- they either die or gain levels to reach a survivable status (that being 3rd). There are some there of course, but since their position is unstable, there won't be as many as there will at the "survival point" of 3rd. Thus, the count isn't a pure logarithmic progression anymore- there's a clear "spike" at the equilibrium point of 3rd level, with falloffs to either side.

If worlds like that exist, it may change how the "highest level" thing works out- characters from such places will be more likely to reach higher levels more quickly. The curve gets skewed. Does that make sense?

The problem with something like Dark Sun, is that races may evolve to be tougher, but you evolve Abilities and Special Abilities, you don't evolve class levels.

So while I agree with the notion of higher ability scores, class levels in and of themselves should remain constant.

As I see it, Humans should start with 3 Hit Dice (from mass) as it is, then add levels on top of that. No medium sized (natural) humanoid should have more than 3 HD unless it is execeptionally dense.

I disagree the idea of a spike. It doesn't make any sense because if all the lower level characters are being wiped out then that invariably means the young will be facing extinction and the race will die out from old age ina few generations.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hiya mate!

I think the highest level being thing was just a general guideline. The more specific the power level you want for your setting, the more you should tweak those numbers.

Obviously such things are always guidelines.

Although I realise now I made a mistake.

It should be 30th (world), 60th (galaxy) 90th (supercluster) and 120th (universe).

Oh, U_K, I never did get to mention your artifact rules work Awesome in the Low-magic spectrum too. (So the a Magical Sword for a commoner is a +1 sword, a major item for him, but wielded by the King, it might be a +5 vorpal blade!) No PC I know would ever go "Hmm This sword is nice, but there are better." With that kind of scaling. It definitely captures the classic Hero-with-legendary-magic-item-X feel instead of the current Batman-esque-utility-belt-of-magic-thingamabobs feel.

Well I suppose Weapons of Legacy published the idea before me, even though it was always my intention.

As for XP rates, Yea, if you use the XP guidelines in the DMG, with 6 EL+0 encounters a day, and 13 needed to level, PCs will be 20th level within 44 in-game days of adventuring. This dosen't include downtime, time spent on other activities, or significantly more powerful foes being defeated. Yea, players level fast, so I think on average D&D games reach 20th in 6 months of once a week 8 hour sessions. Depends on the game style.

 

[Kerrick]

Once you do that you mess up everything as far as I can see.

eg. (Using your method) 1280d6 fireball @ 19th-level spell. 40960 d6 fireball at @ 29th-level spell.

Its ludicrous.

Okay, let's see the math. The first one is using the empower = +2. I rounded down in all cases.

10+5 = 15 (L5), 15+7 = 22 (L7); 22+11 = 33 (L9); 33+16 = 49 (L11); 49+24 = 73 (L13); 73+36 = 109 (L15); 109+54 = 163 (L17); 163+81 = 244 (L19). So an empowered x8 fireball is a 19th level spell dealing 244d6 damage.

I think you meant maximize instead of empower, so we'll look at that one too. Maximize is +3 levels for a doubling of the dice of damage.

10x2 = 20 (L6); 20x2 = 40 (L9); 40x2 = 80 (L12); 80x2 = 160 (L15); 160x2 = 320 (L18); 320x2 = 640 (L21); 640x2 = 1280 (L24).

An empowered x8 fireball is 24th level and deals 1280 dice of damage.

Under my system, the empowered x8 fireball would be 11th-level and deal 244d6 damage; the maximized x8 fireball would be 19th level and deal 1280. So in this case, I think you're right - when I was fiddling around with the feats, trying to prove my theory, I found that the feats that modify damage (maximize, empower, etc.) are all fairly well balanced, with the exception of admixture, which needs to drop a level. I don't mess with damage-dealing spells much at epic levels, so I kind of overlooked this part. There's probably a good chance that only widen and admixture need to be dropped a level. *shrug*

Empower Spell = +2 spell levels. Quod is a double empowerment.

ddq for single empowerment is far too confusing, so you have to use two at a time for it.

That's all well and good, but we're admixing different energy types, not maximizing the existing type (and you're confusing empower and maximize again - empower goes x2, x5, x10, x24 on each doubling, while maximize goes x4, x16, x64, etc.). DDQ doesn't apply to a single maximize - you're only doubling it once. Anyway,

Fireball (L3) + widen (+3) + admix x3 (+9) = L15.

This is, of course, assuming that admix should be +3, not +4.

I wonder what the minimum level is to cast it under the Epic Rules system, about 60th-level or thereabouts perhaps.

Lessee... Spellcraft DC 90. You can take 10, have a +30 Spellcraft item*, and we'll assume you're a wizard with Int 30ish (so +10). That's 50 right there. All you need is 40 ranks, and you're good to go - we'll say around 40th level. For other classes with lower Int (say around 15-20), it would be anywhere from 40-55. If we go with the above and say it's a 15th-level spell, that puts it firmly at 46th level (L21, +spell level*3), which is just about right.

*The absurdity of +x Spellcraft items is another of my gripes about the system, but that's a topic for another thread.

If it was as easy to get to 30th-level as D&D 3rd Edition suggests then every surviving adventurer would be 30th within 3 years. Clearly the EXP rules are a touch too generous.

That's about how long it took. 3 years is a long time, when you think about it - you'd have to be gaming pretty much every weekend, regularly, for that long, and not a lot of groups do that - they break up, take time off, whatever. No argument on the XP rules, though.

If worlds like that exist, it may change how the "highest level" thing works out- characters from such places will be more likely to reach higher levels more quickly. The curve gets skewed. Does that make sense?

That's kind of like our homebrew world - there's always a war going on somewhere, and it's high magic, so while there are plenty of 1st-level commoners out there, there are also plenty of 30th+ level characters running around (or there were; now the highest is a L22 NPC). We still start at L1; the place isn't as harsh as Dark Sun, so there's plenty to do for lowbie adventurers, and their chances of survival are good as long as they stick together and don't do anything stupid.

 

[paradox42]

That's kind of like our homebrew world - there's always a war going on somewhere, and it's high magic, so while there are plenty of 1st-level commoners out there, there are also plenty of 30th+ level characters running around (or there were; now the highest is a L22 NPC). We still start at L1; the place isn't as harsh as Dark Sun, so there's plenty to do for lowbie adventurers, and their chances of survival are good as long as they stick together and don't do anything stupid.

My own homebrew setting actually incorporates two worlds, as it's a hollow planet with an inhabitable inner surface. The outer surface is basically a high-magic, high-power version of a regular D&D world, with occasional departures predicated on the fact that it's a post-apocalyptic setting (most subraces, for example, are explained away as being mutations from original stock). The inner surface was designed to look more like Dark Sun- arcane magic doesn't always work properly there, so the people evolved to use psionics instead. Because the inner surface is a nasty place, when it came time to start making towns and cities down there due to PCs from the outer world going there on a quest, I decided that the standard population rules didn't quite work. Instead I set the base at 3rd level and worked out formulae for the number of 1st and 2nd level characters that were around. The assumption is that 1st and 2nd level characters are apprentices, still learning their trades whatever those may be, and therefore aren't really considered full-fledged ready-to-run adults as it were. They basically learn whatever is needed to reach 3rd very quickly, or get killed by something and disappear from the equation.

I suppose what this really amounts to is a world based on SHARK's principle that an average adult citizen in Imperial Rome (to use an example he's used to explain his game style) had to be at least 8th level in game terms to explain the skills and feats they typically displayed; he estimated that an average modern adult would be between 8th and 10th as well. I hadn't seen his principle when I came up with my skewed population formula, but once I did the concept just made so much sense that I immediately incorporated it into my own philosophy.

I eventually put a rule into the setting which has virtually no effect on PCs, but helps explain how people can become so powerful so quickly. Whatever XP represent, sentient creatures with a century-long average lifespan in my setting gain 1000 XP every year after they reach standard adventuring age; creatures of longer-lived races such as elves and dragons gain an amount based on their lifespan in centuries. Thus, 1st-level humans of any class will only be the youngest and least learned members of society, and anybody who survives a year at that level automatically advances to 2nd. Two years after that, they advance to 3rd, and so on. Anybody who lives to Venerable age will thus be at least 10th level and likely considerably higher. If I were to ever run a long-term campaign in the setting, PCs would gain this time-based XP as well. While I haven't sat down and fully worked out what this sort of thing does to population numbers yet, I'm sure it skews them towards a midpoint somewhere in the middle levels or flattens out the curve until one bypasses 10th or thereabouts.

Naturally, I'd take this idea into account when incorporating any rules for epic-level stuff; it sort of resembles UK's age-based deity categories, i.e. Demi-Deities are between 100 and 999 years Immortal. But it does tend to throw off estimates on number of higher-level (or more powerful-as-deities) individuals in the setting, I think.

 

[Servitor of Wrath]

Hiya mate!



I'd just use +4 Spell Levels per Magic Factor. Which means a flat doubling. So (if I understand you right) you would never need to round up or down.

Exactly. So you might want to change the parts of your mega-magic bit that say, "doubled, round down."

 

[Upper_Krust]

Howdy!

Okay, let's see the math. The first one is using the empower = +2. I rounded down in all cases.

10+5 = 15 (L5), 15+7 = 22 (L7); 22+11 = 33 (L9); 33+16 = 49 (L11); 49+24 = 73 (L13); 73+36 = 109 (L15); 109+54 = 163 (L17); 163+81 = 244 (L19). So an empowered x8 fireball is a 19th level spell dealing 244d6 damage.

I don't like multiplying by 1.5 each time because you can't work it out in one go, you have to work out each empowerment which is far too much of a chore when dealing with multiple empower spell applications.

I think its better to just have two empower spell applications be double. Quicken is double and its also +4 so it makes sense from that perspective.

I think you meant maximize instead of empower,

No, I didn't.

so we'll look at that one too. Maximize is +3 levels for a doubling of the dice of damage.

10x2 = 20 (L6); 20x2 = 40 (L9); 40x2 = 80 (L12); 80x2 = 160 (L15); 160x2 = 320 (L18); 320x2 = 640 (L21); 640x2 = 1280 (L24).

An empowered x8 fireball is 24th level and deals 1280 dice of damage.

Under my system, the empowered x8 fireball would be 11th-level and deal 244d6 damage; the maximized x8 fireball would be 19th level and deal 1280. So in this case, I think you're right - when I was fiddling around with the feats, trying to prove my theory, I found that the feats that modify damage (maximize, empower, etc.) are all fairly well balanced, with the exception of admixture, which needs to drop a level. I don't mess with damage-dealing spells much at epic levels, so I kind of overlooked this part.

[Insert obligatory "I told you so"]

There's probably a good chance that only widen and admixture need to be dropped a level. *shrug*

Quite possibly.

That's all well and good, but we're admixing different energy types, not maximizing the existing type (and you're confusing empower and maximize again - empower goes x2, x5, x10, x24 on each doubling, while maximize goes x4, x16, x64, etc.).

See above, you are confusing what I am trying to simplify.

DDQ doesn't apply to a single maximize - you're only doubling it once. Anyway,

Fireball (L3) + widen (+3) + admix x3 (+9) = L15.

This is, of course, assuming that admix should be +3, not +4.

Is admix even OGL, I don't think I can use that in Grimoire.

Lessee... Spellcraft DC 90. You can take 10, have a +30 Spellcraft item*, and we'll assume you're a wizard with Int 30ish (so +10). That's 50 right there. All you need is 40 ranks, and you're good to go - we'll say around 40th level. For other classes with lower Int (say around 15-20), it would be anywhere from 40-55. If we go with the above and say it's a 15th-level spell, that puts it firmly at 46th level (L21, +spell level*3), which is just about right.

Interesting.

*The absurdity of +x Spellcraft items is another of my gripes about the system, but that's a topic for another thread.

Fortunately my system has no such flaw,

That's about how long it took. 3 years is a long time, when you think about it - you'd have to be gaming pretty much every weekend, regularly, for that long, and not a lot of groups do that - they break up, take time off, whatever. No argument on the XP rules, though.

I'm not concerned with the amount of time played as much as the amount of in game time.

In game time every session could represent a day or week of time. Which means that a character could go from 18 year old and 1st-level to 21 year old and 30th-level. Which to me is bordering on the insane.

I don't think PCs should be going up more than one level per year of their lives. Lets be honest the best fighter in the world should not be 21 years old.

That's kind of like our homebrew world - there's always a war going on somewhere, and it's high magic, so while there are plenty of 1st-level commoners out there, there are also plenty of 30th+ level characters running around (or there were; now the highest is a L22 NPC). We still start at L1; the place isn't as harsh as Dark Sun, so there's plenty to do for lowbie adventurers, and their chances of survival are good as long as they stick together and don't do anything stupid.

A planet with Earths population (6 billion) should have roughly seven to fifteen 30th-level characters (assuming normal lifespans). Interestingly it would have between 8184-16,360 20th-level characters (20-29th-level).

Obviously the likes of Elminster, Halaster and Szass Tam all benefit from being centuries old. But if we know their ages we can easily retrograde them (using my new system*) to find out what level they were when their normal lifespan ran out. Wikipedia says Elminster is 1162 which means he is in his mid-twenties when he reached the end of his normal lifespan.

*

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hello!

My own homebrew setting actually incorporates two worlds, as it's a hollow planet with an inhabitable inner surface. The outer surface is basically a high-magic, high-power version of a regular D&D world, with occasional departures predicated on the fact that it's a post-apocalyptic setting (most subraces, for example, are explained away as being mutations from original stock). The inner surface was designed to look more like Dark Sun- arcane magic doesn't always work properly there, so the people evolved to use psionics instead.

Nice idea!

Because the inner surface is a nasty place, when it came time to start making towns and cities down there due to PCs from the outer world going there on a quest, I decided that the standard population rules didn't quite work. Instead I set the base at 3rd level and worked out formulae for the number of 1st and 2nd level characters that were around. The assumption is that 1st and 2nd level characters are apprentices, still learning their trades whatever those may be, and therefore aren't really considered full-fledged ready-to-run adults as it were. They basically learn whatever is needed to reach 3rd very quickly, or get killed by something and disappear from the equation.

That idea just doesn't sit well with me at all. No race or sub-race should just be able to skip levels. It might evolve to have higher ability scores, but not levels.

I suppose what this really amounts to is a world based on SHARK's principle that an average adult citizen in Imperial Rome (to use an example he's used to explain his game style) had to be at least 8th level in game terms to explain the skills and feats they typically displayed; he extimated that an average modern adult would be between 8th and 10th as well. I hadn't seen his principle when I came up with my skewed population formula, but once I did the concept just made so much sense that I immediately incorporated it into my own philosophy.

NPCs should gain 1000 EXP/year from life.

That means assuming a 18 year old/1st-level starting point.

19 = 2nd
21 = 3rd
24 = 4th
28 = 5th
33 = 6th
40 = 7th
48 = 8th

Whereas adventurers (or indeed soldiers) should probably gain a level each year or thereabouts.

I eventually put a rule into the setting which has virtually no effect on PCs, but helps explain how people can become so powerful so quickly. Whatever XP represent, sentient creatures with a century-long average lifespan in my setting gain 1000 XP every year after they reach standard adventuring age; creatures of longer-lived races such as elves and dragons gain an amount based on their lifespan in centuries. Thus, 1st-level humans of any class will only be the youngest and least learned members of society, and anybody who survives a year at that level automatically advances to 2nd. Two years after that, they advance to 3rd, and so on. Anybody who lives to Venerable age will thus be at least 10th level and likely considerably higher. If I were to ever run a long-term campaign in the setting, PCs would gain this time-based XP as well. While I haven't sat down and fully worked out what this sort of thing does to population numbers yet, I'm sure it skews them towards a midpoint somewhere in the middle levels or flattens out the curve until one bypasses 10th or thereabouts.

Naturally, I'd take this idea into account when incorporating any rules for epic-level stuff; it sort of resembles UK's age-based deity categories, i.e. Demi-Deities are between 100 and 999 years Immortal. But it does tend to throw off estimates on number of higher-level (or more powerful-as-deities) individuals in the setting, I think.

I definately think you touch on a good idea with regards age categories.

 

[paradox42]

Nice idea!

Thanks, but I can't really take credit for it- Dark Sun did it first, though I use a different mechanism for explaining why arcane magic fails. Mine is sort of a mirror-image on an effect which happens on the outer surface of the planet, which enhances magic (all magic, not just arcane) in certain places. It made sense to me that if magic is enhanced on the outer surface, then it's probably enervated or screwed up somehow on the inner one.

Since I feel the discussion on time-based XP/Quintessence gain is more appropriate to Ascension than Grimoire, I'm going to end this post here and post my response to your other arguments in the Ascension thread. Avoidance of threadjacking is good netiquette, after all.

 

[Kerrick]

I don't like multiplying by 1.5 each time because you can't work it out in one go, you have to work out each empowerment which is far too much of a chore when dealing with multiple empower spell applications.

There is that... but if I had the chocie between 3 empowers and 2 maximizes, I'd choose the latter.

I think its better to just have two empower spell applications be double. Quicken is double and its also +4 so it makes sense from that perspective.

But it's not accurate. At the first doubling, you're already 18 dice over what you should be (40 vs. 22), and it just gets worse from there (80 vs. 49 at the second, 160 vs. 109, etc.). Empower is a problematic feat anyway - I've seen several questions about how do you use it with magic missile or suchlike - and what's the point of it? I can do 150% for +2, or double for +3.

That's all well and good, but we're admixing different energy types, not maximizing the existing type (and you're confusing empower and maximize again - empower goes x2, x5, x10, x24 on each doubling, while maximize goes x4, x16, x64, etc.).

See above, you are confusing what I am trying to simplify.

No I'm not. I thought it was very simple - with admix, you're adding the base amount of dice of damage on top of the existing amount. For example, an acid admixed fireball cast by a 10th level caster deals 10d6 acid and 10d6 fire. It's exactly the same as Maximize, with a different energy type. If you maximize that fireball, you get 20d6 each fire and acid, or DDQ.

Is admix even OGL, I don't think I can use that in Grimoire.

No, but if you ask nicely, I bet they'll let you.

I'm not concerned with the amount of time played as much as the amount of in game time.

In game time every session could represent a day or week of time. Which means that a character could go from 18 year old and 1st-level to 21 year old and 30th-level. Which to me is bordering on the insane.

Again, no argument there. I think the XP tables (and by extension, the rest of the system) are skewed too - after 10th level, everything ramps up almost exponentially, making a decent epic system nearly impossible to do. The designers felt that low levels "sucked" and they didn't want players to spend more than they had to (or wanted them to get past them more quickly for survivability's sake), but the plan kind of backfired on them. I think what you want is more of the 1E system, where 15th level was really badass, and 20th was almost unheard of. That, to me, sounds a bit more accurate than the 3E model, but this is what we're stuck with, for better or worse.

I don't think PCs should be going up more than one level per year of their lives. Lets be honest the best fighter in the world should not be 21 years old.

If the DM does his job properly, there will be down time - mages make magic items, PCs go on side quests or take time off or whatever - enough so that a 30th-level fighter should be in his 50s or so. An NPC fighter certainly would be, but a PC, probably not.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey Kerrick mate!

There is that... but if I had the chocie between 3 empowers and 2 maximizes, I'd choose the latter.

There is no double maximise in my system, you only need it once and it applies to all dice.

But it's not accurate.

Not exactly. I created the ddq system and therefore I say the x1.5 is not accurate.

At the first doubling, you're already 18 dice over what you should be (40 vs. 22), and it just gets worse from there (80 vs. 49 at the second, 160 vs. 109, etc.). Empower is a problematic feat anyway - I've seen several questions about how do you use it with magic missile or suchlike - and what's the point of it? I can do 150% for +2, or double for +3.

Empower should really just become Double for +4 Spell Levels, with the staggered doubling in between for +2.

Not 1.5, 2.25, 3.375, 5.0625, 7.59375, 11.390625 etc.

My way is simpler and can be worked out on the fly.

1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 etc.

Bold numbers are +4 spell level increases.

No I'm not. I thought it was very simple - with admix, you're adding the base amount of dice of damage on top of the existing amount. For example, an acid admixed fireball cast by a 10th level caster deals 10d6 acid and 10d6 fire. It's exactly the same as Maximize, with a different energy type. If you maximize that fireball, you get 20d6 each fire and acid, or DDQ.

I'm just not totally sure, when applied to the DDQ system at least, that Admix is balanced.

10d6 Acid
10d6 Electricity
10d6 Fire
10d6 Sonic

is techically balanced against (approx. 70d6 of anyone type, or 60d6 with a converted type)

So would I be better throwing x4 40d6 Hellballs or (x1 70d6 Fireball, x1 60d6 AcidBall, x1 60d6 LightningBall and x1 60d6 SonicBall).

No, but if you ask nicely, I bet they'll let you.

Again, no argument there. I think the XP tables (and by extension, the rest of the system) are skewed too - after 10th level, everything ramps up almost exponentially, making a decent epic system nearly impossible to do. The designers felt that low levels "sucked" and they didn't want players to spend more than they had to (or wanted them to get past them more quickly for survivability's sake), but the plan kind of backfired on them. I think what you want is more of the 1E system, where 15th level was really badass, and 20th was almost unheard of. That, to me, sounds a bit more accurate than the 3E model, but this is what we're stuck with, for better or worse.

Like I said, anything that promotes more epic gaming is okay by me.

If the DM does his job properly, there will be down time - mages make magic items, PCs go on side quests or take time off or whatever - enough so that a 30th-level fighter should be in his 50s or so. An NPC fighter certainly would be, but a PC, probably not.

I remember when training up a level actually took a number of weeks equal to the new level to be gained. level.