Upper Krust, where are you? [Immortal's Handbook]

[Blacksad]

Re: Re: Re: Spell Resistance

Bonsoir mon ami Blacksad!

Salut U_K!

Seemingly Dragons; Solars and the like may need changing to bring them in line.

I forgot those who have a CR well above 20, sorry

I'm still wondering if this is a balancing act too far...?

It would be too far, if the improvement impeded game play, in this case, considering that you have to calculate the CR of the character to determine challenge, you already have the needed number for caster level check somewhere, and the way to roll doesn't involve additional formula.

The reader of the IH doesn't have to know how long it took to create an efficient new rule, he just need to know how to use it.

Perhaps alongside each monster with SR you could put "caster level check 1d20+CR of spellcasting class" in the pdf edition (you aren't really limited by space).

What about the imbalancing of the Spell Resistance feat; as well as spells and items that convey it though!?

Using some of my own house rules in development, you might do something like what I do with the +2DC to spell feat, you can take it every 8 level, except that in the case of spell resistance it would be +2SR every 8 CR, what do you think?

On items that convey spell resistance, I'm not sure that there is an imbalance, IIRC with the maximum of 10% worth of personal gear for a given item (when it's not the primary item of the character), I think that in the ELH the SR was under the character level, thus it protect only against low level opponents. I'll need to check that.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Re: Spell Resistance

Hi all!

Having trouble accessing the boards again - hence the delay in replying. Seems okay for the moment so lets get cracking...

Hi Anubis mate!

The thing that is unbalanced is that fact that two different characters of the same CR have widely different chances of penetrating the same SR, despite being generally at the same power level for purposes of CR.

In other words, two characters of the same CR should have roughly equal chances of penetrating the same SR.

How about a 50th-level Fighter and a 50th-level Wizard?

I doubt that very much, actually. From what I've seen, the normal spells are still far more powerful, usually. There are some exceptions, but all things considered, I think metamagic spells of Levels 1-9 are still the most potent.

Depends on how much you allow metamagics to stack. Also at higher, epic levels expect foes to be immune or at least resistant to most damaging spells.

There were no specific characters, really. Just something with SR 175.

Doubtful anything would ever have SR 175 though! More likely it would simply be Magic Immune or Invulnerable to certain types of spells etc.

Ah, now I understand your hesitation. You thought I was proposing a formula for determining SR!

No, I knew exactly what you were proposing.

That's not at all what I propose. Some thigns will have an SR formula, of course, such as monks and drow. For these, I suggest taking their SR based on their CR as well, so as not to make them too powerful. In other words, a Mnk30 won't have SR 40 but rather SR 35.)

Makes sense for these characters. They can of course always boost their Spell Resistance with the aforementioned epic feat.

For all other monsters with SR, you just need to assign a new SR, if necessary, to fit the challenge of the encounter.

(Using these ideas) You at least need to assign a new SR to those whose CR is modified.

This sort of upheaval is something that bothers me and unless I think its 100% necessary (as with Challenge Ratings) I won't advocate it.

I don't want to have to end up rewriting the core rulebooks here.

First off, let me state that I believe there is no need to change ANY of the SR numbers in the MM,

Dragons; Solar...at the very least.

although you MAY need to change quite a few in the ELH.

Naturally.

Actually, upon actually looking at the numbers in the ELH, you may not need to change many of them either. Just the most powerful creatures', such as the Prismatic Dragon and the Hecatoncheires. Even then, you may not have to change things by much.

Depends on how stringently you adhere to any SR formula; CR+11 seems the average.

What I'm saying is, pretend you make an all new creature, and it turns out to be, oh, ECL 200, which is CR 52. Now SR should change the difficulty too much. Just assign an arbitrary number that fits. Perhaps, in this case, the new monster would have SR 70, or something like that. As long as it is within 16-26 of the CR, you should be okay, more than that if characters aren't supposed to be able to break through SR very easily. See what I'm saying? In other words, you're right, a formula for determining SR simply does not work. You gotta make a judgment call.

You see this bit I agree with.

The MM is okay, either which way, and most of the ELH is okay as well. It's just something worth mentioning, because that's what I'm actually saying.

Dragons are certainly not okay, neither is the Solar (if we advocate at least CR+10).

Don't misunderstand me, however. I'm not saying there is no formula for PENETRATING SR, just no formula for reassigning SR to creatures who may have too much or too little. Assign SR by judgment.

SR = CR anywhere from +10 to +13 seems useful.

For penetration, dispel, and everything else, use CR instead of level.

This is the bit I have issues with.

Like I said, it IS simple, and you wouldn't have to reassign hardly anything.

Its simplicity is not in question, but its necessity is.

Everything in the MM save for MAYBE the Solar is probably already perfect.

...and Dragons.

For the ones you DO have to reassign, forget formulas and reassign based on your best judgment byu taking the CR and adding a number to it to be the average chance of penetrating. (Be CERTAIN to take Spell Penetration, Greater Spell Penetration, and Epic Spell Penetration into consideration when assigning these numbers!)

In that case I would advocate SR = CR+11 (between CR1-10); CR+12 (between CR11-20) and CR+13 (CR21+).

This isn't taking it to the extreme, this is simply making SR relevent at higher levels.

Which it probably won't be.

As it is, with two people with the *same CR*, one could have a 100% chance of penetrating while the other has a 0% chance of penetrating! Certainly that does not work?

The flip side of that being that you have spellcasters with potentially vast level differences both affecting Spell Resistance equally.

Attack and AC and damage and hp are already balanced. That's why the more powerful you get, the higher these numbers get.

Armour Class and Damage* (and Spell Resistance) don't go up with level though.

*Unless you're a Monk.

How so?! This makes levels of the class worth exactly the same no matter when you get the levels, that's all. Makes multiclassing into spellcasting actually worth it (eventually). If you didn't do this, the Ftr40/Wiz4 would only get +1 to penetrate SR while a Wiz4/Ftr 40 gets +4 to penetrate SR, despite them having equal training in spellcasting! No, best to take the levels as they are and determing only that class's CR for penetration.

Spell Penetration is based on spellcaster level (and certain feats) - I don't see why you are trying to confuse yourself.

It's the only way for SR to have meaning at higher levels.

I think you mean balance at higher levels. Obviously it will still have meaning

I hope my answers here haven't injected any confusion into the matter

No more than was already there - I assure you!

. . . If you have ANY questions, just ask, and I'll explain point for point if necessary.

I understand the what, where, why, when and how - I am just not convinced the 'why' is justified.

At the moment I see justification for changing certain monster and character class related spell resistances. But I am not sure I would advocate the changes to spell penetration for anything more than an optional rule at this point.

Also no one (as far as I have read) has seen fit to tackle the unbalancing issue of Spell Resistance feats; items and spells!

 

[Upper_Krust]

Re: Epic Level Demographics

Hi Eä mate!

Ahh! There is the long awaited assumption of which I was talking! Now I see what your second assumption is: The demographics.

As with Challenge Ratings its more important to have a system in place rather than what that system actually is.

Well...given that, I agree: The WotC "way" isn't necessarily the correct one. Well, if that's the assumption you make, the system proposed by WotC is just to throw away. There is no point in using that.

Are we talking about the Demographics in the Dungeon Masters Guide here?

By the way: Have you tried using encounters for calculating character wealth? Say, using the standard NPCs proposed at a given level and take the number of such a party has to face before ascending, and add the total worth of the goods they loot to be the character wealth at the next level? Actually, I think this is a nice little procedure I may indulge to, just to check what the numbers are.

Well I haven't decided upon NPC wealth or personal equipment yet.

(By the way, I suspect that most personal equipment will be specially made for that character, not simple loot found here and there, but the components needed to create such an item may be paid for by the actual loot...at least that's how I see it)

Exactly!

At a certain point the only way to obtain the magic items you want (short of DM generosity) is to either make them yourself or requisition them from other sources.

Which is why I have rules for requisitioning magic items...and its not simply a matter of meeting the Market Price and biding your time by the way!

How do you calculate such demographics!? And why? It would be interested for me to see that.

Simply divide the numbers for each level by half, round down and carry the difference at the end.

eg.

Population 250,000

1st-level = 125,000
2nd = 62,500
3rd = 31,250
4th = 15,625
5th = 7,812*
6th = 3,906
7th = 1,953
8th = 976*
9th = 488
10th = 244
11th = 122
12th = 61
13th = 30*
14th = 15
15th = 7*
16th = 3*
17th = 1*

*Add up the number of times you rounded down fractions. Each time represents a character of +1 level.

18th = 1
19th = 1
20th = 1
21st = 1
22nd = 1
23rd = 1

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Gez mate!

I trust you are keeping well mate!?

I'm just saying "hello !",

Drop by anytime mate, you know that!

I'm a bit lost here in these astronomical numbers.

Don't worry about any of the brainstorming done on this thread - the actual rules are simplicity itself.

This discussion about SR reminds me of my first RPG: a little game known as Dragon Knights (or something like that). The rules were quite simple, everybody had attack (BAB) and defense (AC) scores, dodge (Reflex save) score, and magical attack (caster level ?) and magical defense (roughly SR + will save) scores.

Had D&D been built with a similar principle (SR as a sort of save or AC), this issue would have been, IMHO, much simplified -- if the BAB/AC values are on par, then the CL/SR would be appropriate also.

I think a lot of people are making too much out of the balance issue. At a certain point specialisation will take over and at that point its about roleplaying - not roll-playing.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Re: Spell Resistance

To respond to the points raised by Knight Otu and Ea - I do advocate allowing characters to ascend more than one level per adventure/encounter; though rarely will they ever do so (given the CR system)!

Salut U_K!

Bonjour mon ami Blacksad!

Avant que l'Immortals Handbook soit fini je peux etre a l'aise en francais...?

I forgot those who have a CR well above 20, sorry

It would be too far, if the improvement impeded game play, in this case, considering that you have to calculate the CR of the character to determine challenge, you already have the needed number for caster level check somewhere, and the way to roll doesn't involve additional formula.

I agree the rules are simple to implement.

My point is that (as per Occams Razor) assumptions should not be needlessly multiplied.

The reader of the IH doesn't have to know how long it took to create an efficient new rule, he just need to know how to use it.

Absolutely, the same point I made to Gez in fact.

Perhaps alongside each monster with SR you could put "caster level check 1d20+CR of spellcasting class" in the pdf edition (you aren't really limited by space).

I don't see the concern being space (on this issue anyway).

Using some of my own house rules in development , you might do something like what I do with the +2DC to spell feat, you can take it every 8 level, except that in the case of spell resistance it would be +2SR every 8 CR, what do you think?

Is'nt this what the Spell Focus feats already accomplish?

On items that convey spell resistance, I'm not sure that there is an imbalance, IIRC with the maximum of 10% worth of personal gear for a given item (when it's not the primary item of the character), I think that in the ELH the SR was under the character level, thus it protect only against low level opponents. I'll need to check that.

Looking at the Mantle of Epic Spell Resistance in the ELH it appears they have calculated its value incorrectly.

It should actually be 2,800,000 GP rather than the 290,000 GP they claim (unless I am missing something!?).

However, heres an example of a situation I am relating to:

95th-level Wizard = Spell Penetration 1d20+47 (with 3 spell penetration feats)

84th-level Drow Fighter = CR 40 uses 14 (of 70) feats on Improved Spell Resistance, now SR 68

A Demigod uses 3 SDAs (or equivalents) on improving Spell Resistance now has SR 67*

*I have changed the increase to +10 for that particular ability.

 

[-Eä-]

Greetings!

One thing about your demographics system: What do you do if the population is some power of 2:


Example: Population 524288

1st level: 262144
2nd: 131072
3rd: 65536
4th: 32768
5th: 16384
6th: 8192
7th: 4096
8th: 2048
9th: 1024
10th: 512
11th: 256
12th: 128
13th: 64
14th: 32
15th: 16
16th: 8
17th: 4
18th: 2
19th: 1

Here you have no fractions...

With 500 000 you have

Population 500 000

1st = 250,000
2nd = 125,000
3rd = 62,500
4th = 31,250
5th = 15,625
6th = 7,812*
7th = 3,906
8th = 1,953
9th = 976*
10th = 488
11th = 244
12th = 122
13th = 61
14th = 30*
15th = 15
16th = 7*
17th = 3*
18th = 1*

Leaving the highest at
24th = 1

 

[Xeriar]

Re: Greetings!

One thing about your demographics system: What do you do if the population is some power of 2:

Example: Population 524288

1st level: 262144
2nd: 131072
3rd: 65536
4th: 32768
5th: 16384
6th: 8192
7th: 4096
8th: 2048
9th: 1024
10th: 512
11th: 256
12th: 128
13th: 64
14th: 32
15th: 16
16th: 8
17th: 4
18th: 2
19th: 1

You can do better than that

Population 524,287
1st level: 262143*
2nd: 131071*
3rd: 65535*
4th: 32767*
5th: 16383*
6th: 8191*
7th: 4095*
8th: 2047*
9th: 1023*
10th: 511*
11th: 255*
12th: 127*
13th: 63*
14th: 31*
15th: 15*
16th: 7*
17th: 3*
18th: 1*
19th: 1

Leaving the highest at 36

Someone has a kid, and 17 people experience some massive level-draining action.

It doesn't sum up, either - many, many communities had around a thousand people, but you can't look at them all at once, you have to look at each one, individually, with a static population.

I'm building a different system that tries to calculate based on age, age distribuition, class (sortof) and abilities (as in ability scores). Really complex, that's why it's a computer program and not some silly equation

 

[Knight Otu]

I must admit that I have my problems with the system as well.
If you want to keep it, how about adding the fractions to the 1st level population?

 

[Gez]

Teaching French to Upper Krust

Salut mon pote !
(Hello mate!)

Avant que l'Immortals Handbook soit fini je peux etre a l'aise en francais...?

Ah, c'est pas mal, effectivement.
Il manque juste un "ne" (avant que l'IH ne soit fini, et la deuxième partie de la phrase serait plutôt formulée "je serais peut-être à l'aise en français".

Mais en langage parlé, ça pourrait passer sans problème.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Re: Greetings!

Hi Eä; Xeriar and Knight Otu!

One thing about your demographics system: What do you do if the population is some power of 2:

Example: Population 524288

1st level: 262144
2nd: 131072
3rd: 65536
4th: 32768
5th: 16384
6th: 8192
7th: 4096
8th: 2048
9th: 1024
10th: 512
11th: 256
12th: 128
13th: 64
14th: 32
15th: 16
16th: 8
17th: 4
18th: 2
19th: 1

Here you have no fractions...

With 500 000 you have

Population 500 000

1st = 250,000
2nd = 125,000
3rd = 62,500
4th = 31,250
5th = 15,625
6th = 7,812*
7th = 3,906
8th = 1,953
9th = 976*
10th = 488
11th = 244
12th = 122
13th = 61
14th = 30*
15th = 15
16th = 7*
17th = 3*
18th = 1*

Leaving the highest at
24th = 1

You can do better than that

Population 524,287
1st level: 262143*
2nd: 131071*
3rd: 65535*
4th: 32767*
5th: 16383*
6th: 8191*
7th: 4095*
8th: 2047*
9th: 1023*
10th: 511*
11th: 255*
12th: 127*
13th: 63*
14th: 31*
15th: 15*
16th: 7*
17th: 3*
18th: 1*
19th: 1

Leaving the highest at 36

Someone has a kid, and 17 people experience some massive level-draining action.

It doesn't sum up, either - many, many communities had around a thousand people, but you can't look at them all at once, you have to look at each one, individually, with a static population.

I'm building a different system that tries to calculate based on age, age distribuition, class (sortof) and abilities (as in ability scores). Really complex, that's why it's a computer program and not some silly equation

I must admit that I have my problems with the system as well.
If you want to keep it, how about adding the fractions to the 1st level population?

Unless the numbers are relatively small you shouldn't be able to do more than generalise the population.

I mean you can't know if there are exactly 524,287 people in a given area, what about visitors, some may be away travelling, new born children etc.

At most I suggest you only use the first three digits of a given number.

975 = 975
1,288 = 1,280
44,533 = 44,500
766,619 = 766,000
etc.