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

[Upper_Krust]

Hi all!

Been having some jip with the message boards (as I think a few of you have).

Incidently I happened to catch a cartoon show earlier called 'Samurai Jack' and must say it is tremendous fun! Thoroughly recommended.

Hello U_K!

Bonjour mon ami!

That it was easier for the DM to change the result of a roll, considering that in 1st edition, it was the DM who made the MR roll. So the need to alter the rule was less apparent in the DM's eyes.

Good DMs shouldn't make a habit of fudging dice rolls.

Or perhaps I've missed something, but as far as I'm concerned, my 1st and 2nd edition books list a MR % for each monster, and you used a rule that reduced the monster MR based on the level of the caster?

Exactly. But that was to compensate for the fact that MR was against 11th-level and modified against the opponent.

Whereas in 3rd Ed. they seemingly add '11' (or so) to the monster CR to determine SR.

Or exclude normal rules, that a lot more easier, I can ignore the shaman in OA, but if the katana was missing, it would require more effort to include it.

I agree. But that argument is not relevant to the case at hand.

That's 2 changes that don't cause any problem past those two changes, and it solve an existing problem. You confuse me.

I can understand that you don't see it as a necessity, because in your experience SR is less and less important at high level.

But claiming that the changes cause problem??? which problems?

and it solves a problem!

It makes Spell Penetration ultimately balanced with regards CR - provided we always make a point of balancing Spell Resistance with CR.

Since we cannot* always balance Spell Resistance with CR (because of items; spells; feats etc.) the first endeavour becomes negligable.

*and occasionally should not (something you agree with - remember those foibles).

So why not including it, people will stumble upon the problem, when a DM design a monster with SR, or when player facing monster of their challenge will see a kind of cycle, with SR being easier and easier when they rise in level, until they rise in CR when it becomes sudendly harder.

I'll think about it.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Greetings people!

Hi Eä mate!

I thought I'd just pop in...to say hello, at least. By the way, may I have your e-mail adress, UK? I've just reformatted my hard-drive, losing my address book and such, and I really need to create it anew.

You can always just click on the emailing button following any of my posts.

Here it is regardless:

agooddesigner@hotmail.com

Well, as Einstein said:
If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts.

Absolutely!

Your theory is crazy, it's crazy enough to be true (-:

Actually, I agree!

I knew you were smart from the beginning!

This is more close to the modified system I'm currently using. It's too bad that my algorithm on transcendental CRs failed. Well...I'll have to devise a new one then.

Thats the spirit!

Fortunatelly I have learned not to bore you with my explorations (mathematics is a game played according to certain simple rules with meaningless marks on paper) (-;

I was never bored with your musings...confused yes...bored no.

 

[-Eä-]

Greetings!

But it would usually be the result of luck rather than anything else. For example, if you use the optional rule "Instant Kill" (DMG p64), three successive rolls of 20 on an attack kills instantly the creature. But if that would happen, I would most certainly not give the PC the XP the table says they should have for killing a creature with a CR as high as a great wyrm; I don't even know if I'd give them the XP for defeating a monster of CR=avg level +8.

Oh, and BTW, even though you probably know it, I'll tell you that I didn't understand everything in your mathematical formula. But you should be getting used to that!

I agree that the PC probably didn't deserve the XP in that case, but I would give the XP to the party in which the character was, nonetheless, for the chance of getting three twenties in a row is 1/8000 and you won't roll THAT many dice in one session, so it would happen once per half year or something, which isn't that bad. However, I don't use that optional rule, and even if I did, it would be idiotic and suicidal to do such a thing. The XP would perhaps be from bravery or something if it succeeded...

That's how I see it, at least. The PCs should get all they can from luck, after all, it's more likely to happen from NPCs anyhow, as they represent more than the little party.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi all!

Perhaps then you'll see that although you're the genius of the deities, I'm the genius of the feats!

I would say you were about right half of the time!

I don't think either of you are either.

Thats fightin' talk where I come from!

For the gods, I have my own cosmology, my own ideas. For me, in my campaign, the concept of an overgod exists... the god of a 'galaxy' if you will, but it is to the greatest combined might of the gods as they are to an insect. Not to say that I won't make use of UK's ideas, but I've got my own templates already to suit my needs for more flexible gods

Technically irrelevant given that I am not forcing my cosmology on anyone I am simply widening the options with examples. In fact the entire IH is pretty much modular in nature.

ie. Just because the PHB details Paladins doesn't mean everyone has to play one you know.

For someone who claims to be the "genius of feats" you should have known that. This self-adoration streak of yours isn't flattering or pretty.

Exactly. This thread is only big enough for one self-adoration streak!

And he needed to heal his ego a bit, after Craig told him he was extremely dim-witted, and his sillyness amazes even the gods.

Easy tiger!

No one is calling anyone anything! I only attack the argument itself; not the person.

 

[Blacksad]

Hi all!

Incidently I happened to catch a cartoon show earlier called 'Samurai Jack' and must say it is tremendous fun! Thoroughly recommended.

Hi alone!

It's on Cartoon Network and while the scenario is funny, the quality of animation and drawing sucks IMO, even if its intentional.

Good DMs shouldn't make a habit of fudging dice rolls.

That's a DM style problem, I prefer to not fudge dice rolls, but it doesn't bother me when I'm a player and the Game Master modify the creatures stats during play, as long as I don't see it.

I know that I've done it with pre-made adventures which haven't been playtested.

It makes Spell Penetration ultimately balanced with regards CR - provided we always make a point of balancing Spell Resistance with CR.

Since we cannot* always balance Spell Resistance with CR (because of items; spells; feats etc.) the first endeavour becomes negligable.

*and occasionally should not (something you agree with - remember those foibles).

spell that affect SR? I've missed those, there is some that grant SR, but its always way lower than CR+11 IIRC.

The problem, it seems, is that you consider SR as having a fixed value, while you can grant a bad SR to a monster (CR+6), an average (CR+11) or a good one (CR+17), each with different ECL modifier.

The same thing was made with monster with breath weapon and MR in 2nd edition, under a certain value the ability was worth one hit die, and above it was worth 2 hit dice.

So a monster with SR=CR-20 probably shouldn't have any noticeable ECL modifier.

Considering that it's the DM that fixe SR, I don't understand how he can't determine SR and CR, based on what he wants/need.

and EA will agree with me: you can't consider something negligible because it isn't always.

That's like saying that it doesn't always rain, thus we can ignore rain.

So the endeavour is still worth something.

I'll think about it.

That's the main problem from the beginning, within a given CR, SR has different meaning, that's just silly.

 

[Anubis]

I guess I forgot to mention one thing about the extensions to "death's door" . . . Whoops . . .

Thinks like Remain Conscious and the Headband of Ferocity only work, even in my system, until -10, REGARDLESS of the "death's door" range.

That should clear a lot up.

 

[Anubis]

Bump.

 

[ranix65]

So Upper Krust, are you gonna maybe release this as a .doc or a pdf at some time in the future? I really don't wanna have to go back through all the posts on this topic and try to piece together the rules(I don't mind doing it with my own notes, but with somebody else's it's hard ya know?).

P.S. Rest in Peace, Jam Master Jay(Jason Mizell)
And if it has any connection to Ja Rule, may he be lit on fire and sent on his path to Hell!

 

[Knight Otu]

So Upper Krust, are you gonna maybe release this as a .doc or a pdf at some time in the future?

That's his plan.

He is obviously still waiting on the ELH and D&DG to enter the SRD. I speculated on the WotC boards that this might happen in early 2003, based on the current speed of the SRD releases. (Fingers crossed, indeed!)

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi there!

So Upper Krust, are you gonna maybe release this as a .doc or a pdf at some time in the future?

Yes, (as Knight Otu mentioned) as soon as is legally possible.

I really don't wanna have to go back through all the posts on this topic and try to piece together the rules (I don't mind doing it with my own notes, but with somebody else's it's hard ya know?).

You wouldn't be able to peice together anything substantial from the meagre scraps of information within this thread. So its not something I would advocate anyone try. Its certainly in no way a fair reflection of my work.