Mmmm...Libris Mortis.

[jester47]

Why? You don't have to be a 5th level wizard to have 8 ranks in Knowledge (Arcana) or a 5th level cleric to have 8 ranks in Knowledge (Religion). You just need to be a 5th level character, which means that if you get your last wizard level at character level 5 (or have the Knowledge domain for your cleric levels), you don't even have to pay for the skills as cross-class

Nope, you still have to be able to cast Summon Undead II as a divine caster. So to even start on the path of the TN you have to basicly have Wiz5/Sor5.

Its always been a PrC that you started at the 10th character level even in its 3.0 version in Tome and Blood.

Aaron.

 

[Samurai]

Nope, you still have to be able to cast Summon Undead II as a divine caster. So to even start on the path of the TN you have to basicly have Wiz5/Sor5.

Its always been a PrC that you started at the 10th character level even in its 3.0 version in Tome and Blood.

Aaron.

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

 

[jester47]

No, a dative plural isn't correct--that would mean "to the books of the dead" or "for the books of the dead". "From the books of the dead" would be the ablative plural, "Ex Libris Mortis"--you need the preposition explicitly since there are a bunch of different ones that take the ablative case. This assumes that you allow "the dead" to be a singular noun, which is a little iffy, since it's really a plural term (in which case it would be "Ex Libris Mortium").

Sorry for the pedantry, but my high school Latin teacher would kill me if I let this go by.

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.

 

[jester47]

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

Ahhhh CARK! yeah, cause at 3/3 you are a 6th level character...
asljf'kljg'g
kgflk;g;gf;ljkfg
jkgfkjfdsajlkdfsjkl
jlkfdsakljfdjkldf

<Bangs head on keyboard>
DUH!

Ok. Right.


I think the sample statblock is wrong if the ranks in those skills are 6.

I still think the class is OK. He's only going to ever be able to cast 3 or 4 spells when he confront a PC. And if a PC takes the class, well, thats ok too IMO. Its really specialised. Put them up against an angel or cleric of pelor or hunter of the dead or somthing.

Aaron.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

I'm hoping they errata the boldfaced part, as it makes no sense (are you creating vital organs in the incorporeal creature so you can crit it? if so, can your buddies sneak attack and crit the undead, too? or are they only there the instant you make your attack? if so, can your buddies ready an action to attack those organs when you create them?).

I rather figure that the weapon enhancement lets you target the Negative Energy Conduit (tm) in the undead in question, sort of guiding you towards them.

My issue with it is that it's like they have a hate on for the incorporeal things. So, it can crit or sneak attack incorporeal undead; what about corporeal undead, which, if anything, should be easier?

I guess I'm still stuck with Skullclan Hunter for my rogue-who-hates-undead goodness.

Brad

 

[FireLance]

There isn't really a set pattern to the progression for caster levels as far as epic levels. At 1st & 6th level, they get only Arcane advancement. At 2nd & 7th, only Divine advancement. By that progression, 11th and 12th lvl should be single progressions as well, but they aren't. (If they were, it may help to balance the class...)

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?

 

[Mokona]

More books like Libris Mortis...

With Draconomicon: The Book of Dragons and Libris Mortis: The Book of Undead done so well I have high hopes for Anathema: The Book of Aberrations (especially since I'm not overly fond of aberrations now).

1. Which monster type should get a book next (i.e. which one do you want most and which one would you use most)?

2. Should the next monster type book be a thicker, expensive book like Draconomicon ($40) or a thinner, cheaper book like Libris Mortis ($30)?

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?

 

[Nightfall]

I think a book about shapechangers would be pretty righteous. I mean Slaves of the Moon was great and all...but let's see if WotC can top it. *doubtful*

 

[teitan]

Ghostwalk

Ok, I didn't think of this before but it just hit me pretty good... how useful would this book be in a Ghostwalk campaign? I love me some Ghostwalk but wanted some more to add to it outside of BoVD and the odd book out there... Would this book be keen for a GW game?

Jason

 

[johnsemlak]

[quote-jester47]
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.[/quote]
I'm actually surprised they bothered to CYA. DOn't think it was really necessary. I mean, I really can't believe the complaints of the few remaining Latin teachers could have hurt sales.

The actually effort they put into covering up the Latin mistake ought to appease some people though,[