Author Topic: Template Handbook Discussion  (Read 24508 times)

Offline bhu

  • Uncle Kittie
  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 14249
  • Fnord bitches
    • View Profile
Re: Template Handbook Discussion
« Reply #100 on: July 30, 2014, 06:48:07 PM »
Wizards nixed most of the 3.5 web content.  I've changed the links in the post in the main thread to google cache, but I'd hurry to swipe what you can, we've already lost Zombie.

I may end up having to remove them from the list if we can't link to it somewhere :(

Offline bhu

  • Uncle Kittie
  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 14249
  • Fnord bitches
    • View Profile
Re: Template Handbook Discussion
« Reply #101 on: August 18, 2014, 02:56:38 AM »
Okay I found the new address for everything (or used the wayback machine).  You can thank creature catalog for making the links easy to find, and linking me to 5 new templates: Ba'traa Creature, Disembodied Spirit, Frenzy Dog, Incorporeal Sentinel, and Vhaerath.  I am adding them now.

Offline Mithril Leaf

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 270
    • View Profile
Re: Template Handbook Discussion
« Reply #102 on: August 18, 2014, 10:10:24 AM »
Quorbred are +2 LA.

EDIT: Also you can become an elemental for +0 LA as far as I know only by being an Aberration, Animal, Magical Beast, Plant, or Vermin, and then taking one of Elemental Creature Templates from Manual of the Planes. I personally like Beguilers because they let you be an Amphibious Acidborn creature for -2 Dex, +4 Con. You could add Arachnoid if gunning for Dex as well.

EDIT 2: Paragon does have LA specified in the Epic Level Handbook. It's +11. I think? Page 156.

EDIT 3: Monster of Legend has either +4 or +5 as specified in the Errata, and you have it listed as having no LA in the Wis Divine Caster section.

EDIT 4: Nether hound has LA: - so probably shouldn't be mentioned in your So You've Decided to Become section.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2014, 05:51:32 PM by Mithril Leaf »

Offline bhu

  • Uncle Kittie
  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 14249
  • Fnord bitches
    • View Profile
Re: Template Handbook Discussion
« Reply #103 on: August 18, 2014, 09:20:11 PM »
Fixed Quorbred, found the errata for Monster of Legend and redid it.  I used the srd for doing the epic level templates, and it listed no LA for paragon.  I looked in the book, and it doesnt either.  Page 156 lists CR.

WIll address the other two concerns later tonight.

Offline Mithril Leaf

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 270
    • View Profile
Re: Template Handbook Discussion
« Reply #104 on: August 18, 2014, 09:25:24 PM »
Fixed Quorbred, found the errata for Monster of Legend and redid it.  I used the srd for doing the epic level templates, and it listed no LA for paragon.  I looked in the book, and it doesnt either.  Page 156 lists CR.

WIll address the other two concerns later tonight.

It lists them by CR but displays their ECL, which is Hit Dice + Level Adjustment.

Offline bhu

  • Uncle Kittie
  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 14249
  • Fnord bitches
    • View Profile
Re: Template Handbook Discussion
« Reply #105 on: August 19, 2014, 02:01:37 AM »
Yes but that page is borked.  As an example in the Mercane entry it says it's ECL 7.  Looking at their entry a Mercane has a +7 LA, and 7 HD, which should put them at ECL 14.  It's not even fixed entirely in the errata, as critters have a fairly low or high ECL that seems entirely independent on what they can do (and Mercanes are still ECL 7).  Looking through threads people are claiming it 'should' be anywhere from +8 to +30, but I can't seem to find an official answer.


Quote
Also you can become an elemental for +0 LA as far as I know only by being an Aberration, Animal, Magical Beast, Plant, or Vermin, and then taking one of Elemental Creature Templates from Manual of the Planes.

Was there a template I listed that has a wrong LA you're specifically referencing?
« Last Edit: August 19, 2014, 03:59:10 AM by bhu »

Offline Mithril Leaf

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 270
    • View Profile
Re: Template Handbook Discussion
« Reply #106 on: August 19, 2014, 05:55:35 PM »
Yes but that page is borked.  As an example in the Mercane entry it says it's ECL 7.  Looking at their entry a Mercane has a +7 LA, and 7 HD, which should put them at ECL 14.  It's not even fixed entirely in the errata, as critters have a fairly low or high ECL that seems entirely independent on what they can do (and Mercanes are still ECL 7).  Looking through threads people are claiming it 'should' be anywhere from +8 to +30, but I can't seem to find an official answer.


Quote
Also you can become an elemental for +0 LA as far as I know only by being an Aberration, Animal, Magical Beast, Plant, or Vermin, and then taking one of Elemental Creature Templates from Manual of the Planes.

Was there a template I listed that has a wrong LA you're specifically referencing?

Regardless of whatever the "official" LA of Paragon is, everyone can agree it isn't 0. That's the sort of thing that gives LA less templates stacking a worse name than is already has.

And I believe the template you're thinking of is Half-Elemental which was given LA in a Dragon Magazine, +3 if I recall correctly.

Offline bhu

  • Uncle Kittie
  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 14249
  • Fnord bitches
    • View Profile
Re: Template Handbook Discussion
« Reply #107 on: August 19, 2014, 06:36:55 PM »
I already have Half-ELementtal listed as +3.

Offline Mithril Leaf

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 270
    • View Profile
Re: Template Handbook Discussion
« Reply #108 on: August 19, 2014, 07:28:50 PM »
I already have Half-ELementtal listed as +3.

I though you were thinking that one of my templates suggested was previously referred to as having no LA, which was changed. I was simply referring to your advice section for Arcane Casters saying that Demonically Fused Elemental is a good template if you can find a +0 LA way to make yourself an elemental. I'll try and explicitly point out any issues I see. Anything in boring paragraph format is usually just my assorted musings.

Offline bhu

  • Uncle Kittie
  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 14249
  • Fnord bitches
    • View Profile
Re: Template Handbook Discussion
« Reply #109 on: August 19, 2014, 08:39:10 PM »
Aaah, sorry for the misunderstanding. 

Offline Mithril Leaf

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 270
    • View Profile
Re: Template Handbook Discussion
« Reply #110 on: August 27, 2014, 02:24:59 PM »
Sacred Guardian requires 0 Int.

Corrupted by the Abyss has LA to -, it shouldn't be listed in the recommended section for con based psuedocasters.

Ditto with Lost.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2014, 03:50:16 PM by Mithril Leaf »

Offline bhu

  • Uncle Kittie
  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 14249
  • Fnord bitches
    • View Profile
Re: Template Handbook Discussion
« Reply #111 on: November 11, 2014, 07:59:18 PM »
And I'm finally back.  You guys want the 3.0 classes added to the "So You've Decide to Become a" posts?

Offline bhu

  • Uncle Kittie
  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 14249
  • Fnord bitches
    • View Profile
Re: Template Handbook Discussion
« Reply #112 on: November 15, 2014, 02:00:53 PM »
Free naked statuary for our first 4 repliers.   :D

lol

Offline awaken_D_M_golem

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 7296
  • (un-) Amazingly Unproductive
    • View Profile
Re: Template Handbook Discussion
« Reply #113 on: November 15, 2014, 02:19:41 PM »
Yes the "Lost" template is " - " , but it's so easy to get to do it.


What do I win ?
avatar#3 , gravitational lensing edition ... I'm way on the other side of the universe but look like pretty rings

Offline bhu

  • Uncle Kittie
  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 14249
  • Fnord bitches
    • View Profile
Re: Template Handbook Discussion
« Reply #114 on: November 15, 2014, 06:21:14 PM »
You get to vote on the next pope  :D

Assuming you can bullshit your way through the process once we smuggle you in...

Oh and one of those marble statues of incredibly cut athletes who are hung like babies.

Offline unseenmage

  • Lurker
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: Template Handbook Discussion
« Reply #115 on: December 04, 2014, 11:18:08 AM »
Just wanted to drop by and say a great big THANK YOU for providing these lists. Have been exceedingly helpful in my endeavor to build a set of random d% charts with every playable creature on them by ECL.

That the Web content, Dragon mag, AND Dungeon mag content is listed is fantastic. Kudos.


If you're interested here's the current Entomanthrope WotC link: http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/re/20040621a


Dragon 343 also has the Arcane Dragon listing which, though it isn't completely formatted like a regular template, it does have the line, "Arcane dragons possess all of the standard true dragon traits (see page 68 of the Monster Manual), plus they gain the following special qualities:", which to my mind removes the need for the text to provide many of the standard elements found in other template listings.
From there it follows standard (well for the article) template formula and considering that it already states the rest of the statistics I'd consider it a template. A +0 LA Template even.


Also, not sure if this is super helpful to you for this particular endeavor but it is relevant at least. Using the spell Greater Humanoid Essence (RoE) to make a Construct into a Humanoid lets you apply other spells that change the Construct's type and/or abilities.

The neat thing is that even after the Greater Humanoid Essence spell wears off the changes caused by the other spell(s) (eg. Mineral Warrior, Telepathic Bond) persist even though the Construct would normally not benefit from them due to type restrictions.
This shows that a creature's type changing due to a spell doesn't cause other spells affecting based on its type to cease functioning. If that were the case then Greater Humanoid Essence would cease functioning itself as soon as it changed the creature's type.

Offline bhu

  • Uncle Kittie
  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 14249
  • Fnord bitches
    • View Profile
Re: Template Handbook Discussion
« Reply #116 on: December 05, 2014, 04:54:21 PM »
I'll add those in somewhere as soon as I get the chance!  Thank you!!

Offline unseenmage

  • Lurker
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: Template Handbook Discussion
« Reply #117 on: December 14, 2014, 01:55:35 AM »
What you've called the "Diabolical Half-Fiend (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060630a)" WotC calls the "Customized Half-Fiend Template" on this "More (Half-)Fiendish Variety" page in the Elite Opponents archive: http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/eo/20070209a&pf=true

Thought you might like to know. Also gives you several new pseudo templates if you think they qualify.

Offline bhu

  • Uncle Kittie
  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 14249
  • Fnord bitches
    • View Profile
Re: Template Handbook Discussion
« Reply #118 on: December 14, 2014, 02:28:20 AM »
It still says Diabolical Half-Fiend when i click the link.  By Pseudo Templates do you mean the monster examples?

Offline unseenmage

  • Lurker
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: Template Handbook Discussion
« Reply #119 on: February 24, 2015, 11:53:28 AM »
Yes, each separate monster example they have listed is preceded by it's own Customized Half-Fiend template. The way they're presented each one is really a template in it's own right.

It's almost as if the header is Diabolical Half-Fiend while the individual templates are called Customized Half-Fiend (Insert-Base-Fiend-Name-Here).
An oddity to be sure.

For my Every Playable Monster by ECL Lists project it was useful to me to use the Customized Half-Fiend moniker and list them all separately.
But you are right, they do refer to the template(s) by both names.

In retrospect I suppose your use of the header name is more useful for your purposes. Sorry.


While I'm here, here's a link to the Monstrous Vampire from Ghostwalk where it was presented in a preview in the WotC archives:
http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20031225a

Oh and thanks again. Yours is still the best list with the best references I've found. You set one heck of a standard.  :D