Mmmm...Libris Mortis.

[CrusadeDave]

True Necromancer Underpowered.

Hey, stop thinking Mystic Theurge or True Necromancer and start thinking Mystic Theurge and True Necromancer. Am I correct in thinking that a Clr3/Wiz3/MT9/TN5 casts spells as a Clr16/Wiz16?

This would be the only way I could see this Prestige Class being Playable.

Sticking with the straight True Necromancer starting at 7th level would be supremely unplayable for long periods of time.

In my campaign, my best player is playing a Mystic Theurge. He uses his spells perfectly, uses his Luck Domain Power aggressively on Spell Penetration rolls, and is one of the most dynamic and creative casters I've ever seen in my 12 years of RPGing.

His character is by far the weakest member of the party. His Cohort is more powerful then he is.

Anyone who thinks the TN is going to be more powerful then the MT needs only look at one thing:

At 9th level, a Clr 3/Wiz 3/MT 4 is going to be casting 4th level spells.
At 9th level, a Clr 3/Wiz 3/TN 4 is going to be casting 3rd level spells.

I can't imagine my player being another level behind the casting tree. You think MT starts off slow, is painful in the mid levels, gets better by upper mid, and is finally balanced possibly overbalanced in the uppergame?

I can't imagine any TNecros surviving long enough to get Dimension Door at 11th level. And they'll need it to escape the hoardes of mid level heroes that will want to get XP from his bloated CR.

 

[dargoth3]

Summon Undead II is a new 2nd lvl spell in LM... you can enter TrNec at 3/3.

Summon Undead 1-5 spells have actually been around for years they orgionally appeared in the 1ed Lords of Darkness source book for the Forgotten Realms, the latest version of the Spells where published in The Players guide to Faerun

 

[Connorsrpg]

By Makona:
3. What name would you pick for your choice of a monster type book?

____: The Book of Fey
____: The Book of Elementals
____: The Book of Giants
____: The Book of Constructs
____: The Book of Oozes

Would it make sense to have a monster subtype themed book (in the tradition of Draconomicon) like The Book of Chaotic?

Do you think WotC will ever do any of these books?

I just gotta say I loved themed books! Much prefer a theme than the old choose a class/race and do a book about them. Books on cold areas, deserts, the forests, serpent folk and particular alignments rock. I really am for this 3.5 way of doing the books (even though a couple haven't lived up to all expectations - notably Complete Divine).

When a player wants something in particular then these books make it easier to refer them to. More usable by DM and players too.

To answer your question I am not sure which monster/group I would like to see next. Giants would be great, but in our CS we don't have all the varieties. Elementals would be nice, what about goblinoids? I can't get enough of the basic evil races like orcs, but these are perhaps too narrow in focus. I just can't pick exactly what group should get a book. All chaos creatures may be a bit muddled too, especially for a whole book. Though a batch of new chaotic monsters in a Chaotic Book (in the vein of BED & BoVD - two of my absolute favs) now that would rock!
Connors

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I'd love books about non-cutesey (mostly) fey, giants, genies and elementals (especially if it updated a lot of Al-Qadim content, like tasked genies), underwater creatures, fiends or goblinoids/orcs/kobolds.

 

[Jolly Giant]

As tired as I am of the whole MT/TN dsicussion, I'm still gonna pipe in with my 2 cents worth:

I'm now gonna sit down and make a wiz3/clr3/TN14/MT10 for my epic campaing. Taking Practised Spellcaster twice, he will be able to cast spells like a wiz30 and a clr30, at level 30! At that level the classes just might be over-powered.

However, to get that kind of power, he's given up a total of 6 regular feats (4 wiz-bonus feats, plus the 2 PS) and 3 bonus epic feats, if you compare him to a straight wiz. Compared to a straight clr, he's still used up those 2 PS's, lost 13 levels of rebuking power and lost out on 3 bonus epic feats.

The more I think about it, the more underpowered he sounds...

 

[Jolly Giant]

As for what king of book I'd like to see next in this "series", I'm a little undecided. What I could have used right now is a book on fiends and a book on celestials. However, my current planar campaign will probably be over within six months and the need won't be as pressing. I'll probably want to start something completely different after that, but as I'm not really sure what I don't know what kind of book I'll need either.

Giants would be good, though! Yeah, put down one vote for "Libris Maximus" or possibly "Encyclopaedia Titanica"!

 

[Garnfellow]

Could someone please provide some details on the gravetouched ghoul?

 

[Cold0]

I think that the MT/TN discussion is quite interesting, but is it possible to some more infos about other aspects of Libris Mortis as feats, monsters, template and prestige classes? Just a bit, while I'm waiting my Amazon- delivered book...

 

[Lord Rasputin]

Pete,

However you should take into consideration that your HS latin teacher and my HS latin teacher and College Latin professor all teach Classical Latin. Medieval latin, church latin, and the latin of the people durring roman times, all have different rules. Classical (the one everyone learns in HS and college) is almost exclusivly (so I have been told) derived from the surviving works of Cicero and some of his contemporaries. Basicly its very very propper latin.

Still the title does not make sense. But I think their explanation is pretty good. Goes from Ex Libris Mortium to Libris Mortium, to Libris Mortis through the ages... Its a clever CYA.

Aaron.

The rules for Ecclestical Latin are based on Vulgar Latin, the common tongue spoken even in Cicero's time. They are indeed more relaxed and free, but the basics of the tongue are no different. "Libris Mortis" has the same meaning in Ante-Classical, Golden Age Classical, Silver Age Classical, Second Golden Age Classical, Post-Classical, Vulgar, Ecclestical and Neo-Latin -- dat/abl Books of Death.

What I think has happened here is that someone at WotC marketing tried to be clever when he should have kept it simple. I would imagine that the original intent was "Liber Mortis" to play on "Rigor Mortis" -- the correct impulse, though I could see "Libri" to be proper, since "Liber" was typically just a long scroll. But then someone remembered a long ago Latin lesson, and tried to make the two words agree by giving them the same ending (though the "i" in the suffixes have different values -- the pronunciation is "li'-brees mor-tis") and before someone thought to grab a dictionary, it was on the books.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I remember the early days of d20 when some third party publishers were putting out books with massively overpowered PrCs on the justification that they were intended as NPCs/sold their soul/whatever. That doesn't wash then and it doesn't wash now, IMO.

If it is overpowered, that is.

Picking on Green Ronin again with their Secret College of Necromancy eh? Shame on you.

To a point, I agree. However, I think that making such classes like equal to CL +1 for determining experience points awards and other factors helps even them out nicely and makes their CR a little better when players do wind up fighting them.