Scarred Lands OGC Statblocks

[Ketjak]

Hi! I read here that S&S was going to release statblocks for their OGC from Creature Catalog & CC2 in January, as well as errata that "fixed" the rather ludicrous CRs. Is either of those happening?

The effort should be interesting, as the name of each creature is not OGC, as per their declaration. Will the names be deliberately misspelled to allow their use and easy reference in the hardcovers, or will some other convention be created?

- Ket

edit: fixed typo, added a strategic comma.

 

[Nightfall]

Uhm I don't know where you heard this rumor but I think, once again, the grapevine line needs a repair man.

What is actually happening IN January (or perhaps February) is they will be release Creature Collection 1 (not Catalog. Different beast all together), in a Revised format. The reason for this is because CC1 was going to finish out it's print run and they had a decision, send out a book filled with errors and then try to some how put out a massive errata, OR make a new book with some of the same monsters but with a few new features CC1 didn't have. One of those is now there will be an appendix for Templates, which will be from existing creatures, such as Hags, Morgaunts, Fatlings, and the Unhallowed. Also they cut out a few creatures, such as the Herald of Vangal and Drendari's avatar since they are both now in the Divine and the Defeated (which is where they should be.) This was to make room for the two new appendixes. The second one will feature the racial stat modifiers for the PHB type races (dwarves, forsaken elves, gnome etc.) from both the SL DM's companion and the Termana Gaz. Also if you're wondering about such things, there will be ELC and racial stat adjustments for some of the monsters in the book (such as SL Harpies and Mantacori.) Finally the last appendix will appeal to those that always wondered "Gee how DO I fix in a Beholder, an Aranea, or even just a regular bugbear?" Much like what introduced in Relics and Rituals two, each monster will have a short one to two paragraph length entry about what titan they came from, some of their particular history if any, and also any favored regions they might be seen in.

There is a corrected listing of CRs for Creature Collection 1 online. However with the release of CC Revised, that will become slightly unnessary.

Creature Collection 2, as far as I know, doesn't need that kind of fix for the most part. (I mean do you really believe a Solar is a CR 19?)

I hope that answers your question to some degree.

 

[Ketjak]

It answers the question with a long version of "no." It generates other questions.

I looked for the corrected CC CRs (hello alliteration!) before Christmas and again today, and found them today. Thanks.

I'm glad to know those other changes will be in place, though I certainly won't buy a new version of the book. Will the changes be available on the Internet? I mean legally.

(After all, I don't need the templates, I can do simple math on my own pretty well and thus can distill racial stat modifiers, and I can actually create my own reasons for inserting beholders, aranea, bugbears, et alia. I know, it's an odd ability.)

CC2 CRs out of whack include pretty much anything that casts spells as a sorcerer:

Arcane Symbiote: casts spells as a 4th level sorcerer with Silent and Still meta-magic feats applied to all spells. Has special abilities and d8 hit dice. Listed as CR1 or +1 to host's CR, not CR4 or higher as a 4th-level sorcerer with special abilities would rate.

Blood Crone: casts spells as a 17th-level sorcerer. Really, really smart, wise and charismatic. Special abilities. Listed as CR15. Whee!

And there are others, like the Blood Sea Jellyfish, that represent physical threats and are rated low:

BSJ: 3 hit dice. Vermin. DC 17 2d6 Dex damage poison (while swimming). 120' movement when it's important. AC of 7, admittedly. Listed as CR1.

Bonewing: 8d12 hit dice. DC 13 1d6 STR poison. Undead + extra immunities. Flight w/ INT of 6. Listed as CR3. (Plain undead, like skeletons, tend to have CRs equal to half their hit dice - and zombies only get partial actions).

Those two aren't as bad as pretty much anything listed as casting like a sorcerer, but it still doesn't really work. It's true that there are lots of very good monsters that do work and the CC2 is certainly much better than CC1. Both have been recommended buys for all my friends and will continue to be so.

- Ket

 

[Nightfall]

It answers the question with a long version of "no." It generates other questions.

I looked for the corrected CC CRs (hello alliteration!) before Christmas and again today, and found them today. Thanks.

Glad I could help and I'm glad to help answer any questions.

I'm glad to know those other changes will be in place, though I certainly won't buy a new version of the book. Will the changes be available on the Internet? I mean legally.

If you mean "Will there be stuff posted online like previews?" It's possible. If you mean "Will there be errata" I think it's safe to say no. Such errata would be almost as long as the either book.

(After all, I don't need the templates, I can do simple math on my own pretty well and thus can distill racial stat modifiers, and I can actually create my own reasons for inserting beholders, aranea, bugbears, et alia. I know, it's an odd ability.)

True but this takes all that information and distills into ONE book instead of searching for it online or doing it yourself. Plus better artwork this time around! I really strongly suggest you invest in this book, mainly because it takes the entire Creature Collection 1 to another level. But then that's just my opinion. You're allowed to feel otherwise.

CC2 CRs out of whack include pretty much anything that casts spells as a sorcerer:

Arcane Symbiote: casts spells as a 4th level sorcerer with Silent and Still meta-magic feats applied to all spells. Has special abilities and d8 hit dice. Listed as CR1 or +1 to host's CR, not CR4 or higher as a 4th-level sorcerer with special abilities would rate.

Blood Crone: casts spells as a 17th-level sorcerer. Really, really smart, wise and charismatic. Special abilities. Listed as CR15. Whee!

And there are others, like the Blood Sea Jellyfish, that represent physical threats and are rated low:

BSJ: 3 hit dice. Vermin. DC 17 2d6 Dex damage poison (while swimming). 120' movement when it's important. AC of 7, admittedly. Listed as CR1.

Bonewing: 8d12 hit dice. DC 13 1d6 STR poison. Undead + extra immunities. Flight w/ INT of 6. Listed as CR3. (Plain undead, like skeletons, tend to have CRs equal to half their hit dice - and zombies only get partial actions).

Those two aren't as bad as pretty much anything listed as casting like a sorcerer, but it still doesn't really work. It's true that there are lots of very good monsters that do work and the CC2 is certainly much better than CC1. Both have been recommended buys for all my friends and will continue to be so.

- Ket

As I said, the CRs in the book aren't perfect but then not everyone has Scott Greene or Monte Cook on speed dial or available to work on such issues. But I do believe if you're worried about the spell-casting ones just adjust them to suit their respective spellcasting levels. IE: If it casts as 17th level sorcerer it's a CR 17. For the most part this holds true for about half the spellcasting ones. IE: Athenia is a CR 20 creature and has spellcasting abilities as 20th level sorcerer as well as 12-th level druid. Thus she's a CR 20. CR aren't set in stone, they are guidelines for the most part. If that were so, many dragons would be like 2 to 3 CRs HIGHER than listed in the PHB, mainly because of High HD and pretty good attack ratings. So while I can understand you going "Oh my god!!" at some, I don't think the CRs on MOST of them are broken or need as much fixing.

 

[Ketjak]

Er?

Glad I could help and I'm glad to help answer any questions.

If you mean "Will there be stuff posted online like previews?" It's possible. If you mean "Will there be errata" I think it's safe to say no. Such errata would be almost as long as the either book.

True but this takes all that information and distills into ONE book instead of searching for it online or doing it yourself. Plus better artwork this time around! I really strongly suggest you invest in this book, mainly because it takes the entire Creature Collection 1 to another level. But then that's just my opinion. You're allowed to feel otherwise.

Er, the stats for the races in the CC are already in the CC, and the reasons for MM critters being in the SL are already in my head, so you're recommending I shell out another $30 for new art and templates - one of which we might use once? Um. <blink> SS' stuff is good, but not worth twice as much as the listed retail price.

And I think it's safer to say there will be errata. I'm looking for a way to upgrade my current version without buying a new one that has most of the same information in it. That's more reasonable than spending $30 for new CRs and a few lazy-aids.

As I said, the CRs in the book aren't perfect but then not everyone has Scott Greene or Monte Cook on speed dial or available to work on such issues. But I do believe if you're worried about the spell-casting ones just adjust them to suit their respective spellcasting levels. IE: If it casts as 17th level sorcerer it's a CR 17. For the most part this holds true for about half the spellcasting ones. IE: Athenia is a CR 20 creature and has spellcasting abilities as 20th level sorcerer as well as 12-th level druid. Thus she's a CR 20.

You go through a lot of PCs as a DM, don't you?

For what it's worth, Athentia's CR is probably undergunned as well. A 20th level sorcerer has a CR of 20, give or take for abilities and items and whatnot. But she's not a mere sorcerer.

A Sor20/Drd12 is CR 32, give or take. She has only 28 hit dice, but has well more hit points than the "average" sor20/drd12 will have (she has 322, vs Joe Average's 136 (70+66, assumes Con12). Let's scale her back a little because she doesn't have magic armor or items and no Spell Resistance (!) so say she's down to 75% of what her class abilities would indicate - 24 or so. I'd drop her to 22 for the spell resistance oversight on the designer's part. She's not as scary as a dragon, that's for sure. "...One of the most feared... creatures in the Scarred Lands." Not!

CR aren't set in stone, they are guidelines for the most part. If that were so, many dragons would be like 2 to 3 CRs HIGHER than listed in the PHB, mainly because of High HD and pretty good attack ratings. So while I can understand you going "Oh my god!!" at some, I don't think the CRs on MOST of them are broken or need as much fixing.

Yes, I know the CR system is a guide. It looks as if the CC1 & CC2 monster authors were a little shy on knowledge of the system. I'm following those guidelines/, without Scott's or Monte's number on my speed dial!

To repeat myself for the sake of clarity: it's a good book and I'd buy CC3 if it were out! It just overlooked some things about the CR system that will utterly annihilate your parties if you're not careful. It could use an errata to fix those CRs (and a few other things).

I didn't say "MOST of them are broken or need as much fixing." In fact, I said

It's true that there are lots of very good monsters that do work and the CC2 is certainly much better than CC1.

Anyway, this is academic though fun. You've made this clear:

- no web availability of further CC1 upgrades
- no electronic availability of CC1 or CC2 statblocks is planned (though you never addressed that specifically, so I'm inferring)

You also didn't specifically address whether or how SS was going to address making their OGC critter stats available without changing the name of the critters. I can infer

- no plan exists, and we're on our own

That all true?

- Ket

 

[Nightfall]

Re: Er?

Er, the stats for the races in the CC are already in the CC,

Uhm not for Mountain Dwarf, Dark Elf nor Wood Elf. Those were never mentioned in the CC. Nor are there rules for alternate human stats or terali. (A Termanian race). But that's a little off the mark I'll grant you since all those Ghelspadian can be found in the SL DM's screen. That's also not mentioning the fact of how they chose favored class..but again those things are mentioned in the other book

and the reasons for MM critters being in the SL are already in my head,

True but I also think you might find a few innovative. I mean how do you fit in Xill? Or Bodaks? Rakashas? Rasts? Death Slaadi? Harpies? (Not the SL kind mind you, but the other kind?) Gorgons? I'm just saying save yourself some time and energy.

So you're recommending I shell out another $30 for new art and templates - one of which we might use once? Um. <blink> SS' stuff is good, but not worth twice as much as the listed retail price.

I'm recommending you not expend unnessary energy.

And I think it's safer to say there will be errata. I'm looking for a way to upgrade my current version without buying a new one that has most of the same information in it. That's more reasonable than spending $30 for new CRs and a few lazy-aids.

Right but I doubt you'll be seeing any. S&SS relies on OTHERS to do their errata. Not the freelancers. Not the developers. The public. So far there's not been errata for over HALF the stuff out there, only just two books (well full errata anyway.)

You go through a lot of PCs as a DM, don't you?

You'd be surprise. I usually don't as I know my PCs. And I know what they can and can't handle. I've already had them fight a Vile wight, (CR 8), some Uridezu (EL 7) and Skivers. (EL 6). And that's just me being mild.

For what it's worth, Athentia's CR is probably undergunned as well. A 20th level sorcerer has a CR of 20, give or take for abilities and items and whatnot. But she's not a mere sorcerer.

A Sor20/Drd12 is CR 32, give or take. She has only 28 hit dice, but has well more hit points than the "average" sor20/drd12 will have (she has 322, vs Joe Average's 136 (70+66, assumes Con12). Let's scale her back a little because she doesn't have magic armor or items and no Spell Resistance (!) so say she's down to 75% of what her class abilities would indicate - 24 or so. I'd drop her to 22 for the spell resistance oversight on the designer's part. She's not as scary as a dragon, that's for sure. "...One of the most feared... creatures in the Scarred Lands." Not!

Scary enough for me. Besides she probably has spell turning as one of her spell selections along with a few other powerful abjuration spells.

Yes, I know the CR system is a guide. It looks as if the CC1 & CC2 monster authors were a little shy on knowledge of the system. I'm following those guidelines, without Scott's or Monte's number on my speed dial!

To repeat myself for the sake of clarity: it's a good book and I'd buy CC3 if it were out! It just overlooked some things about the CR system that will utterly annihilate your parties if you're not careful. It could use an errata to fix those CRs (and a few other things).

Right but I'm just getting the feeling that you see this book as needing errata. I'm saying it won't happen. Or at least not any time within 2003 as the developers and everyone else has their focus on other projects. Errata they are giving to other folks or at least waiting on others.

Anyway, this is academic though fun. You've made this clear:

- no web availability of further CC1 upgrades
- no electronic availability of CC1 or CC2 statblocks is planned (though you never addressed that specifically, so I'm inferring)

I'll address that now. There will mostly likely NOT be CC1 or CC2 electronic availability online from the site or anywhere else for that matter. You contact Clark Peterson for permission to use them as WotC did...but that will only get you to CC1. CC2 requires some one up along the White Wolf chain.

You also didn't specifically address whether or how SS was going to address making their OGC critter stats available without changing the name of the critters. I can infer

- no plan exists, and we're on our own

That all true?

- Ket

Indeed there is no plan that I know of and I doubt there will be. Though I have no actual knowledge of this, I'm more than reasonable sure this will not occur.

 

[Ketjak]

Re: Re: Er?

Uhm not for Mountain Dwarf, Dark Elf nor Wood Elf. Those were never mentioned in the CC. Nor are there rules for alternate human stats or terali. (A Termanian race). But that's a little off the mark I'll grant you since all those Ghelspadian can be found in the SL DM's screen. That's also not mentioning the fact of how they chose favored class..but again those things are mentioned in the other book

I need more races like I need more bills. Besides, I've got a functional MDwarf, DE, and WElf - I'll just make them grim and Gothy, or buy the DM's Screen (which I've been meaning to do anyway). Maybe others need more races, though.

True but I also think you might find a few innovative. I mean how do you fit in Xill? Or Bodaks? Rakashas? Rasts? Death Slaadi? Harpies? (Not the SL kind mind you, but the other kind?) Gorgons? I'm just saying save yourself some time and energy.

Tee hee. I have no doubt it'd be interesting - the SS guys write the best backgrounds for D20, with all due respect to the rest of the publishers out there.

Right but I doubt you'll be seeing any. S&SS relies on OTHERS to do their errata. Not the freelancers. Not the developers. The public. So far there's not been errata for over HALF the stuff out there, only just two books (well full errata anyway.)

Well, that's just sloppy. I know about the manpower limitations on developers, being one of a different color. If there are problems with a product, there should be errata for it available at the developer's or publisher's site, even if it's compiled by other folks. I've used my share of fan testers before, too, and providing a file in a library isn't a drain on manpower.

You'd be surprise. I usually don't as I know my PCs. And I know what they can and can't handle. I've already had them fight a Vile wight, (CR 8), some Uridezu (EL 7) and Skivers. (EL 6). And that's just me being mild.

Ya big cuddly teddy bear!

Scary enough for me. Besides she probably has spell turning as one of her spell selections along with a few other powerful abjuration spells.

Admit it - she's a gaping mouthed yawner with a good backstory and a trick power.

Right but I'm just getting the feeling that you see this book as needing errata. I'm saying it won't happen. Or at least not any time within 2003 as the developers and everyone else has their focus on other projects. Errata they are giving to other folks or at least waiting on others.

_Every_ book can use errata. The best developers compile it and make it available, whether they find the bugs or someone else does. <shrug> I'm just sayin'.

I'll address that now. There will mostly likely NOT be CC1 or CC2 electronic availability online from the site or anywhere else for that matter. You contact Clark Peterson for permission to use them as WotC did...but that will only get you to CC1. CC2 requires some one up along the White Wolf chain.

If you mean "permission to use the names," no problem - that's silly, though, since they can be changed while retaining reference ability.

If you mean "permission to use the stats," well, I don't need that - and neither does anyone else. It's all open content. I'm just going to name my Sphinx-like soft underbellied critter's statblock "Athpentia." And I like "Bloody Sea Jelly."

What do you think?

- Ket

 

[Nightfall]

Re: Re: Re: Er?

I need more races like I need more bills. Besides, I've got a functional MDwarf, DE, and WElf - I'll just make them grim and Gothy, or buy the DM's Screen (which I've been meaning to do anyway). Maybe others need more races, though.

Right well that's another kettle of fish. I'm just explaining to you what is happening here.

Tee hee. I have no doubt it'd be interesting - the SS guys write the best backgrounds for D20, with all due respect to the rest of the publishers out there.

Yes they do and you can thank Joseph Carriker, one of the two developers for the Scarred Lands for his efforts. God knows I am.

Well, that's just sloppy. I know about the manpower limitations on developers, being one of a different color. If there are problems with a product, there should be errata for it available at the developer's or publisher's site, even if it's compiled by other folks. I've used my share of fan testers before, too, and providing a file in a library isn't a drain on manpower.

Right well, sadly there are only TWO developers and they both have a lot to do with other products that need to be out before certain deadlines. It's the nature of the beast. Sadly the people they trusted to do didn't come through for the errata for the other products. So they just kept on going. They had to. It's a publish or perish kind of world. (See the defunct d20 companies.) Not everyone has the time or the energy to put out errata. Hell WotC hasn't put out that much errata and the reason they can is because they PAY people to do it. S&SS has no one in their department to do that.

Ya big cuddly teddy bear!

You should see what I have install for them later.

Admit it - she's a gaping mouthed yawner with a good backstory and a trick power.

Perhaps, but I believe she might have great forsight and probably would be ready for most assaults by mortals.

_Every_ book can use errata. The best developers compile it and make it available, whether they find the bugs or someone else does. <shrug> I'm just sayin'.

Right well even developers need to take time and figure out what's what. So far that I've seen Joseph and Anthony Pryor have been slaving away for the past year. (Though I believe Anthony has said he's taking half the year off to spend more time with his family.)

If you mean "permission to use the names," no problem - that's silly, though, since they can be changed while retaining reference ability.

If you mean "permission to use the stats," well, I don't need that - and neither does anyone else. It's all open content. I'm just going to name my Sphinx-like soft underbellied critter's statblock "Athpentia." And I like "Bloody Sea Jelly."

What do you think?

- Ket

Right...but I'm sure that WotC still had to ask to use those monsters from Creature Collection 1. It's just good manners, not to mention the fact that the copyright holders prefer it. You want to do it, go right ahead.