The (new) Immortals Handbook Thread

[Dyson]

phfffft



*plop!


"Ahhh....."

 

[Baronovan]

vile damage is healed without too much trouble, while permanent damage is either actually permanent or *very* hard to heal.

The thing about vile damage is that it's as good as permanent damage inside of the encounter in which it's dealt. Afterwards, it takes a little more effort to heal, but nothing too tough. Permanent damage affects all fights from here on out, limiting your resources unfairly based on the idea that "you knew the risks", which doesn't placate me at all. I don't know how anyone else feels.

I think some important questions are: how much permanent damage do these things deal? what is the modifier used for the attack? what is their rough CR? If these things balance out a minimal (I'm talking a few d3s here) amount of such damage, it might not be completely over the top, but I'm betting on it being ludicrous.

 

[CRGreathouse]

I think some important questions are: how much permanent damage do these things deal? what is the modifier used for the attack? what is their rough CR? If these things balance out a minimal (I'm talking a few d3s here) amount of such damage, it might not be completely over the top, but I'm betting on it being ludicrous.

I'm not really in a position to argue for or against this, but I will say that it seemed fairly balanced -- it's not costed like vile damage would be.

 

[Anabstercorian]

The thing about vile damage is that it's as good as permanent damage inside of the encounter in which it's dealt. Afterwards, it takes a little more effort to heal, but nothing too tough. Permanent damage affects all fights from here on out, limiting your resources unfairly based on the idea that "you knew the risks", which doesn't placate me at all. I don't know how anyone else feels.

I think some important questions are: how much permanent damage do these things deal? what is the modifier used for the attack? what is their rough CR? If these things balance out a minimal (I'm talking a few d3s here) amount of such damage, it might not be completely over the top, but I'm betting on it being ludicrous.

I would be disappointed if there weren't creatures at the high end of the scale that did enough permanent, unhealable damage in a single blow to kill the typical 20th level barbarian ten times over.

The Multiverse doesn't have to be nice. If you find the concept of permanent damage appalling, strike it from your game and include none of the options based around it. But ultra-high-level gaming gets weird and horrible without apology - your ability to run like hell is almost unlimited, after all.

 

[S'mon]

Nice retort.

Sorry, came out ruder than I intended. Really though, players have no business concerning themselves with wealth-by-level and all that. And for the DM, unless the PC is so badly mauled he's now weaker than a 25PB Iconic of equivalent level, the sacred 'balance' will be maintained. If he actually is weaker, give him a negative ECL adjustment. And of course PCs can become weaker, that's fundamental to the Worship Points System. There are plenty of permanently weakening effects in lower level games too - level-draining undead, death & raising/resureection, etc.

 

[S'mon]

If the creature's strength is in dealing permanent damage to you, how long before it finds a way to circumvent whatever method is being used to avoid melee? Not looking like a solid argument here...

Well then, you presumably scream and die in horrible agony? That's what happens to PCs IMC who get overconfident, whether they're 1st level or 100th.

 

[S'mon]

I guess I'll just have to choose to ignore this creature, whatever it ends up being. Not including such a player-shafting ability in my game is a risk I'm willing to take as a DM.

Um... no-one ever said you were obliged to include this creature in your game?! The last thing I would do is stick it in some random dungeon crawl. When deity PCs IMC get mangled by some horrible beastie/deity it's because they screwed up badly, not because I rolled "96-97:Hel" on the random deity encounter table...

 

[Plane Sailing]

phfffft



*plop!


"Ahhh....."

Do you think that is clever? We don't. Banned for three days.

Regards,

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey Baranovan mate!

That aside, how about not being able to stand up any more encounters after one fight with one of these "perma-damage" whathaveyous? Has this even crossed your mind?

Of course.

If high levels would then otherwise imply that my numbers start to go back down, where's the point in that? I think you're painting yourself into a corner.

Not at all, Challenge Ratings remain consistent throughout. Simply that the higher in challenge rating you go the more the impossible becomes possible.

Which means its not a case of the same mechanics over and over again with higher numbers, but also fresh perspectives and new possibilities.

Like the one a character would undoubtedly already have at high-epic levels?

...so...get a better one. Increase your constitution with Great Constitution. Increase your hit points with Improved Toughness. Dominate someone (preferably a barbarian with hundreds of hit points), imbue with spell ability (shield other) then use a wish and permanency - hey presto, an extra few hundred hit points.

Hmm.. smells like paint to me.

Tastes like chicken more like.

As Valeria would say, "Do you want to live forever."

Vile damage can be played up to hell and back, made flavorful, and even cured if the circumstances are right. What you just described is nothing more than a string of adjectives.

Vile damage is simply vile damage, not permanent damage. It means you have to cast a consecrate or hallow spell before you can heal up. Or it means you have to wait until the end of the battle to heal. Or you can quickened planeshift (or teleport) to holy ground then heal and then planeshift/teleport back again (assuming you are not fighting on holy ground already or have no consecrate/hallow spells).

Permanent damage is permanent damage, not vile damage. You can't heal it because there is nothing left 'to' heal.

Two different things.

I don't see a "step up" or a "bigger challenge", I see a broken mechanic.

Firstly, its not broken at all, you're simply scared of it...which was indirectly the point in the first place.

Secondly they already have epic monsters (in the ELH) that deal permanent damage and these are CR 23 and 26 respectively. You could even be fighting them at non-epic levels according to WotC.

Thirdly I give the option in the text itself on how to reverse this effect. Its incredulous that you're still busting my chops over it!

I guess I'll just have to choose to ignore this creature, whatever it ends up being. Not including such a player-shafting ability in my game is a risk I'm willing to take as a DM. Why not just have a creature who kills permanently?

How in the Nine Hells is permanent death okay by you, but permanent damage isn't!?

...oh, and who says I don't have creatures that kill permanently.

As in, no resurrections will abate it? Or maybe have a creature whose victims always lose a point of Con after resurrection?

A 'point' of constitution. At epic levels. Hardly a cause for concern.

Anything is better than forcing those people who get into melee with it to retire if they manage to survive because with non-recoverable HP loss, that's essentially what I'm seeing here.

No one has forced anyone into melee with anything.

But you have just already given me carte blanche to retire characters by making them non-resurrectable - so whats the difference here?

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey U_K!

Hey historian mate!

I concur but I believe that we are in the minority.

Probably. But I think once the furore surrounding the latest film is over, things may be different.

I don't have the novelization handy but my recollection is that it is "Plagueis." That means it's probably spelled otherwise.

Yes I noticed it spelt that way by someone over at aintitcool.

The d20 effort isn't bad, but IMO, too many of their character write-ups are clustered around the same level of power. For instance, only one or two levels separate Vader and Sidious (seems like Vader is 18th or 19th and Sidious is 20th). There is also the issue of what to do with characters above 20th level, although I think the unofficial answer is to continue extrapolating class benefits beyond 20th. However, I think that there is a greater disparity in power between classes than standard d20 fare (the Jedi and Sith classes, for example, benefit from several abilities -- such as enhanced base lightsaber damage -- that other classes don't get), so the "clustering" might not be as tight as it would seem.

Anyway, I prefer to think of Yoda and Sidious as having distinct, but not insurmountable advantages over say Obi-Wan and Darth Vader (something like CR 30 vs. CR 20).

Well from the movie, we can see that there wasn't that much difference between the top Jedi/Sith. So the main characters must have all been about 16-20th level.

It really did a nice job of capturing the feel of the Original Trilogy I thought. I have several of the D6 books.

It was a great system I thought, quick and easy. Also starting characters were fairly powerful (unlike D&D).

Incidentally, I've found that the D6 system readily (almost obviously) converts to the old Marvel system.

How exactly?