The Immortals Handbook

[Upper_Krust]

I had them all - the whole clan - beautifully statted out in great detail (by 1e standards - nothing like 3e statblocks of course!) and you just killed them all with Cresswell's Gaseous Breath Weapon of Mass Destruction!

They were too young to die... *sob*

It was for the best, trust me.

Anyway the Mind Flayers probably sewed the verbeeg corpses together to make another 'Killing Machine'.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi CRGreathouse mate!

If you criticize the damage, surely you also see problems with the rate of fire, no?

Absolutely, its not a one dimensional problem or answer in this case.

By the way (all) I meant to ask what you though was more reflective of Godzillas breath weapon.

#1: 160d20 'atomic' energy

#2: Split the breath weapon between blast(50%)/fire(35%)/radiation(15%).

Something like: 80d20 blast/56d6 fire/4d6 points of constitution damage.

 

[historian]

Krust, I enjoyed seeing Thrin, those are some STRONG stats for 1st ed.

I've also enjoyed reading the last few pages of this thread, from the crunchy stuff to the more narrative.

I agree with the boards' disappointment with the scaling of d20 modern, very troubling. I'm wondering whether immortals statted in low physical factor campaigns would look different than those statted in high physical factor campaigns? Ex. - The requisite blasting power required to destroy a planet in a low physical factor world might be very different, would the difference make that level of power unavailable to an elder god in high physical factor campaigns but not in a low physical factor campaign?

Another problem with 3ed scaling, at least at high levels, is that strength damage bonuses peter out. For instance, I think I calculated that a strength level of approx. 605 would allow one to lift a planet, but the damage bonus associated with that level of strength would only be + 297. Certainly size categories can adjust for that, but what about super-powered beings who are only 6' or so?

If you don't get to these questions don't worry -- save up for the IH.

 

[CRGreathouse]

Given the same draw weight a crossbow will do slightly less damage than a longbow, not more. But the most powerful historical longbows have draw weights around 130lbs, while x-bows can have arbitrarily high draw weights and 300lb+ was common. The useful draw weight of a longbow is limited by the strength of the wielder; with a winch crossbow it's only limited by the strength of the materials. So you can easily make a crossbow that does ten times the damage of a longbow - but it'll only fire 1/10 (or less) as often. IRL that's usually overkill, in D&D though it might be quite handy.

I don't agree that it would be only slightly less; a longbow should do more damage than a crossbow of twice its draw weight. But to be fair, crossbows with truely awe-inspiring draw weights have existed -- over 500 pounds!

 

[Interested2]

"Anyway the Mind Flayers probably sewed the verbeeg corpses together to make another 'Killing Machine'."

Careful there with the OGL..

 

[Moulin Rogue]

That HD size progression caught my eye, because I was thinking of going with the WP/VP system from Star Wars in my next campaign... and it happens that from Medium-size on down, it coincides well with the idea in this thread of basing it on size: a base of 10 wound points virtually matches a base of 2-3 HD.

It doesn't scale well at all for multi-HD monsters from Large on up though... wonder if a formula for Hit Die beyond first could be found that could be applied to big multi-HD monsters.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi historian mate!

Krust, I enjoyed seeing Thrin, those are some STRONG stats for 1st ed.

The strongest.

I've also enjoyed reading the last few pages of this thread, from the crunchy stuff to the more narrative.

Some interesting points being raised.

I agree with the boards' disappointment with the scaling of d20 modern, very troubling.

Well I don't really have a problem with d20 Modern, more with d20 Future which seems to have an almost non-existent physical factor.

I'm wondering whether immortals statted in low physical factor campaigns would look different than those statted in high physical factor campaigns? Ex. - The requisite blasting power required to destroy a planet in a low physical factor world might be very different, would the difference make that level of power unavailable to an elder god in high physical factor campaigns but not in a low physical factor campaign?

Well not necessarily. One way to look at this is comparing Hollywood Godzilla to Japanese (Toho) Godzilla. You could say the Hollywood Godzilla exists in a High-Physical Factor setting. However both would have similar stats (although the Hollywood Godzilla seemed to be just a big dinosaur and didn't exhibit any special abilities).

The Gods of Low Physical Factor worlds might be like the Highlander Immortals in a High Physical Factor world. In fact our Cyberpunk 2020 foray felt a lot like Highlander.

Another problem with 3ed scaling, at least at high levels, is that strength damage bonuses peter out. For instance, I think I calculated that a strength level of approx. 605 would allow one to lift a planet, but the damage bonus associated with that level of strength would only be + 297. Certainly size categories can adjust for that, but what about super-powered beings who are only 6' or so?

Well I think its strength 410 to lift a planet of Earth size (+200 bonus). However, one way to circumnavigate this (that I have in the IH) is that a certain amount of strength multiplies your base damage.

If you don't get to these questions don't worry -- save up for the IH.

...'don't get to questions'...unthinkable.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi CRGreathouse mate!

I don't agree that it would be only slightly less; a longbow should do more damage than a crossbow of twice its draw weight. But to be fair, crossbows with truely awe-inspiring draw weights have existed -- over 500 pounds!

What is the average draw weights of bows? 100lbs?

Maybe there should be a strength bonus automatically assigned to X-bows dependant on their draw weight?

 

[S'mon]

By the way (all) I meant to ask what you though was more reflective of Godzillas breath weapon.

#1: 160d20 'atomic' energy

#2: Split the breath weapon between blast(50%)/fire(35%)/radiation(15%).

Something like: 80d20 blast/56d6 fire/4d6 points of constitution damage.

Is Blast the physical impact of the superheated air; Fire the heat damage, and Radiation is damage from Gamma rays and Alpha & Beta particle radiation? In that case I'd think Blast & Fire damage would be equal and Radiation only a small direct effect (though with lingering consequences). I suspect that trying to 'realistically' model a breath weapon based on a nuclear blast might be a doomed enterprise, in D&D terms Godzilla's breath looks like Fire breath so that's what I'd tend to treat it as, or else sui generis 'atomic' energy if you didn't want ER (Fire) to apply.

 

[S'mon]

Another problem with 3ed scaling, at least at high levels, is that strength damage bonuses peter out. For instance, I think I calculated that a strength level of approx. 605 would allow one to lift a planet, but the damage bonus associated with that level of strength would only be + 297. Certainly size categories can adjust for that, but what about super-powered beings who are only 6' or so?

Well Power Attack is your friend here. But obviously a 6' being can't kill a planet by hitting it, no matter how strong.