Author Topic: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming  (Read 16052 times)

Offline sirpercival

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 10855
  • you can't escape the miles
    • View Profile
Re: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming
« Reply #20 on: October 19, 2012, 01:36:50 PM »
In terms of fixing WBL, when I wrote that I immediately thought of your houserules, phae. ;)  However, I think it can get messy at high levels with consumables, as we're discovering in this work-through.

The fundamental question is, should consumables and permanent items have different tracks, or compete for the same track?  The former has the advantage of ease of design, since we don't have to come up with one method which manages both versions; the latter has the advantage of being more balanced.
I am the assassin of productivity

(member in good standing of the troll-feeders guild)

It's begun — my things have overgrown the previous sig.

Offline sirpercival

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 10855
  • you can't escape the miles
    • View Profile
Re: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming
« Reply #21 on: October 19, 2012, 01:42:09 PM »
Why not use the official fluff as a springboard? The ideas for powerful entities/locations/stuff are there, not anywhere in PRP I can see.
The official fluff comes nowhere near the amount of the original Planescape material, and is more of a tacked-on addition than a setting in and of itself, which is what I'm going for.  Granted, the PRP stuff is nowhere near complete as well, but we're going to be rewriting stuff anyway. 

I think we're on the same page, but talking at cross purposes, so let me try and clarify.  My thought was essentially that this project would add all the high-level fluff and opponents, using inspiration and stuff from Planescape and other official stuff, not that the PRP fluff is the be-all end-all of the planes.
I am the assassin of productivity

(member in good standing of the troll-feeders guild)

It's begun — my things have overgrown the previous sig.

Offline oslecamo

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 10080
  • Creating monsters for my Realm of Darkness
    • View Profile
    • Oslecamo's Custom Library (my homebrew)
Re: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming
« Reply #22 on: October 19, 2012, 01:44:01 PM »
There are more pieces that I'd like to throw in here for discussion.

1) How do we make things like Poison, Curses, and Diseases relevant at high/epic level?
2) How do we make things like Skills relevant at high/epic level?
1)Remove immunities. Replace them with high save bonus against that kind of effect and "don't auto-fail on a natural 1 against this". Some diseases are so virulent they can affect even undeads and constructs.
2)What I've been doing so far is making new effects based on your skill ranks. However if you ask me, skills by themselves should not be special. Skills backed up by the right feats/class abilities should be special. A rogue should be awesome at hiding-the rogue should not be awesome just because they get hide as a class skill, since that means everybody else with hide as a class skill suddenly stealths as well as the rogue.

I wonder whether we should add another category of spells that need fixing to the list: party role replacers.  This would include things like Divine Power, Knock, Divine Insight, etc.
Kill them with fire and call it a day. It's not like spellcasters don't have a bazillion other spells to play with.

True... maybe they should still need to be attuned AND lower your WBL pool when actually consumed...
Agreed.

Offline sirpercival

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 10855
  • you can't escape the miles
    • View Profile
Re: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming
« Reply #23 on: October 19, 2012, 01:46:51 PM »
I'd rather not just go through and axe spells if I can help it...
I am the assassin of productivity

(member in good standing of the troll-feeders guild)

It's begun — my things have overgrown the previous sig.

Offline Garryl

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4508
    • View Profile
Re: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming
« Reply #24 on: October 19, 2012, 01:50:12 PM »
There are more pieces that I'd like to throw in here for discussion.

1) How do we make things like Poison, Curses, and Diseases relevant at high/epic level?

I had some higher level diseases and Contagion spells on the old boards. I'll root around and see if I still have them on my computer. They're in the old 1001 ideas thread, regardless.

Quote
2) How do we make things like Skills relevant at high/epic level?

I wonder whether we should add another category of spells that need fixing to the list: party role replacers.  This would include things like Divine Power, Knock, Divine Insight, etc.

Opening doors is not a party role. At least, not a dedicated party role. Its something everyone can do, whether by casting spells to open the door, casting spells to bypass the door, using lockpicks to pick the door, using picks to pick the wall, or using boots to bust the door.

On a related note, I wouldn't worry too hard about skills. It would be nice to make them relevant at all levels, but unlike class features, anyone can do skills (just some better than others). Sort of like how anyone can do attack rolls (just some better than others).

Now, that said, I once went through the PHB, pulled out most of the spells that completely replace skills, and wrote up some quick, fairly standardized replacements that had similar results but using actual skill rules. Again, it should be in the old 1001 ideas thread on BG.

2)What I've been doing so far is making new effects based on your skill ranks. However if you ask me, skills by themselves should not be special. Skills backed up by the right feats/class abilities should be special. A rogue should be awesome at hiding-the rogue should not be awesome just because they get hide as a class skill, since that means everybody else with hide as a class skill suddenly stealths as well as the rogue.

Seconded.

Offline phaedrusxy

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 10708
  • The iconic spambot
    • View Profile
Re: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming
« Reply #25 on: October 19, 2012, 01:52:34 PM »
1)Remove immunities. Replace them with high save bonus against that kind of effect and "don't auto-fail on a natural 1 against this". Some diseases are so virulent they can affect even undeads and constructs.
I don't really like this... Perhaps change any immunity granted by an effect not based on type to be just a huge bonus and no auto-fail on 1s, but I think type-based immunities make sense. If there is a disease so virulent it can affect undead, then it should be a specific thing (named ghouls-bane or something), not a general rule making all undead potentially vulnerable to all diseases...

However, this gets into yet another problem I have with the core rules, which may seem somewhat contradictory to what I wrote above, but hear me out...

The way some types work is just stupid. Why do ghouls and vampires not actually need to feed (all undead do not need to eat)? Why are vampires immune to crits, and all mind-affecting things (they have minds, and a physiology. they still need their heart)? Likewise, not all constructs are mindless (and hence shouldn't all be immune to all Mind-Affecting), nor should all of them be immune to crits (break a critical gear, or kill its "brain", and it should die). As much as I know Oslecamo hates a lot of Frank and K's stuff, I do have to push for their alternate subtypes for Undead (Dark-minded and Unliving), which remove a lot of the type-based immunities. I'd also like to see subtypes like these used/developed for constructs, plants, and vermin where it makes sense (i.e. intelligent constructs shouldn't be immune to all Mind-Affecting things).
I don't pee messages into the snow often , but when I do , it's in Cyrillic with Fake Viagra.  Stay frosty my friends.

Offline sirpercival

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 10855
  • you can't escape the miles
    • View Profile
Re: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming
« Reply #26 on: October 19, 2012, 02:00:24 PM »
I agree about making more subtypes for this stuff, though I have to say I don't like the way Frank & K did it either.  The way they assigned the abilities makes no sense to me.
I am the assassin of productivity

(member in good standing of the troll-feeders guild)

It's begun — my things have overgrown the previous sig.

Offline oslecamo

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 10080
  • Creating monsters for my Realm of Darkness
    • View Profile
    • Oslecamo's Custom Library (my homebrew)
Re: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming
« Reply #27 on: October 19, 2012, 02:02:40 PM »
1)Remove immunities. Replace them with high save bonus against that kind of effect and "don't auto-fail on a natural 1 against this". Some diseases are so virulent they can affect even undeads and constructs.
I don't really like this... Perhaps change any immunity granted by an effect not based on type to be just a huge bonus and no auto-fail on 1s, but I think type-based immunities make sense. If there is a disease so virulent it can affect undead, then it should be a specific thing (named ghouls-bane or something), not a general rule making all undead potentially vulnerable to all diseases...
It wouldn't really make all undeads vulnerable to everything, since most diseases have fixed DCs and those are pretty low.

However, this gets into yet another problem I have with the core rules, which may seem somewhat contradictory to what I wrote above, but hear me out...

The way some types work is just stupid. Why do ghouls and vampires not actually need to feed (all undead do not need to eat)?
That's why they're evil. They crave fresh flesh/blood, but don't actually need it to survive (as pointed out in Libris Mortis). It just gives them kicks.

Why are vampires immune to crits, and all mind-affecting things (they have minds, and a physiology. they still need their heart)? Likewise, not all constructs are mindless (and hence shouldn't all be immune to all Mind-Affecting), nor should all of them be immune to crits (break a critical gear, or kill its "brain", and it should die). As much as I know Oslecamo hates a lot of Frank and K's stuff, I do have to push for their alternate subtypes for Undead (Dark-minded and Unliving), which remove a lot of the type-based immunities. I'd also like to see subtypes like these used/developed for constructs, plants, and vermin where it makes sense (i.e. intelligent constructs shouldn't be immune to all Mind-Affecting things).
I'm against this, because then we notice it we'll have a bazillion diferent subtypes, and then we have to deal with all the effects that care about subtypes, and it's a whole load of paperwork that could've been evaded with just making vampires actual living beings (can you really call yourself an undead when you've been stripped out of pretty much all actual undead traits?) that gain a bunch of standard feats like Iron Will for free if you still insist they totally have a complete phisiology.

I for one still hate with a burning passion 4e's "we auto-die when hit by a natural 20(headshot!), which means the living cannot be headshoted" zombies.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2012, 02:04:57 PM by oslecamo »

Offline Garryl

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4508
    • View Profile
Re: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming
« Reply #28 on: October 19, 2012, 02:08:33 PM »
Here we are, found my diseases and skill tweaks.

Diseases
(click to show/hide)

Skills
(click to show/hide)

Offline phaedrusxy

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 10708
  • The iconic spambot
    • View Profile
Re: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming
« Reply #29 on: October 19, 2012, 02:40:58 PM »
I'm against this, because then we notice it we'll have a bazillion diferent subtypes, and then we have to deal with all the effects that care about subtypes, and it's a whole load of paperwork that could've been evaded with just making vampires actual living beings
We really only need two, I think: versions of Dark-Minded and Unliving that can be applied to anything, and which basically just make them not immune to Mind Affecting, and vulnerable to crits (and maybe tweak a few other things). Making up two subtypes is a lot easier than rewriting every monster that is screwed up because of the type rule blanket immunities that make no sense.

It wouldn't really make all undeads vulnerable to everything, since most diseases have fixed DCs and those are pretty low.
It would make them vulnerable to anything they don't pass with a 1 on their saving throw, which is a lot given their sucky Fortitude saves. Any bonus given to compensate for this would have to be quite large, like +15 or something.

That's why they're evil. They crave fresh flesh/blood, but don't actually need it to survive (as pointed out in Libris Mortis). It just gives them kicks.
And I hate that. That's not what all the stories about them say. The rules just flat-out contradict all the fiction, which sucks. Those Libris Mortis rules were badly written patch jobs to cover it up. We can do better (at least a bit).
I don't pee messages into the snow often , but when I do , it's in Cyrillic with Fake Viagra.  Stay frosty my friends.

Offline oslecamo

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 10080
  • Creating monsters for my Realm of Darkness
    • View Profile
    • Oslecamo's Custom Library (my homebrew)
Re: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming
« Reply #30 on: October 19, 2012, 02:52:04 PM »
I'm against this, because then we notice it we'll have a bazillion diferent subtypes, and then we have to deal with all the effects that care about subtypes, and it's a whole load of paperwork that could've been evaded with just making vampires actual living beings
We really only need two, I think: versions of Dark-Minded and Unliving that can be applied to anything, and which basically just make them not immune to Mind Affecting, and vulnerable to crits (and maybe tweak a few other things). Making up two subtypes is a lot easier than rewriting every monster that is screwed up because of the type rule blanket immunities that make no sense.
Every monster? Vampire is a single monster. And as demonstrated by Alucard from the Hellsing manga, they've been known to have all the blanket immunities indeed.


It would make them vulnerable to anything they don't pass with a 1 on their saving throw, which is a lot given their sucky Fortitude saves. Any bonus given to compensate for this would have to be quite large, like +15 or something.
So be it.

And I hate that. That's not what all the stories about them say. The rules just flat-out contradict all the fiction, which sucks.

Last time I checked, pretty much every fiction with ghouls/vampires has them go over massive periods of time whitout anything to "eat" and that doesn't stop them from jumping upon the part of heroes and messing up their day.

Really, what was the last time you heard of a vampire/ghoul starving to death? Because one of the basis of undead apocalypses is that those things don't die naturally and even if they consumed most of the world population, they're coming for more. Those zombie ghoul hordes don't have anything more to eat, yet they force the heroes to hole in until they find a way out or get eaten. Ghouls/vampires have never been defeated by starvation.

Heck, in the marvel zombies parallel universe the story ends with the undead heroes actually learning to control their hunger.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2012, 02:54:37 PM by oslecamo »

Offline sirpercival

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 10855
  • you can't escape the miles
    • View Profile
Re: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming
« Reply #31 on: October 19, 2012, 03:08:20 PM »
What if immunity granted you, not only a large bonus to saves, but also a flat failure chance (like 50% or something)?
I am the assassin of productivity

(member in good standing of the troll-feeders guild)

It's begun — my things have overgrown the previous sig.

Offline phaedrusxy

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 10708
  • The iconic spambot
    • View Profile
Re: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming
« Reply #32 on: October 19, 2012, 03:11:53 PM »
Really, what was the last time you heard of a vampire/ghoul starving to death?
The vampires in Anne Rice's books do go into a state of torpor if they don't eat, but yes you have a point... I don't remember any of them ever starving to death, in any story... although the threat did seem to exist. They just always managed to find something to eat, what with their being supernatural monsters and all. :P I do think that they are driven insane in some stories if they are deprived of their "food", though.

Every monster? Vampire is a single monster.
As far as the Mind-Affecting immunity, that's not just a single monster. There are lots of creatures in D&D which have minds, but which are somehow inexplicably immune to all things that would affect their minds, just due to their type. I do not buy all the justifications for why this is (alien mindset, etc). Is the mind of a once-human lich really more alien than that of a mindflayer? Hell no. And yet the first is somehow immune to all mind-influencing effects, while the latter is perfectly vulnerable to them.

What if immunity granted you, not only a large bonus to saves, but also a flat failure chance (like 50% or something)?
I don't think that any creature with a mind should even have a bonus to Mind-Affecting effects, unless it is specifically part of their write-up somehow.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2012, 03:15:47 PM by phaedrusxy »
I don't pee messages into the snow often , but when I do , it's in Cyrillic with Fake Viagra.  Stay frosty my friends.

Offline Prime32

  • Over-Underling
  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 2914
    • View Profile
Re: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming
« Reply #33 on: October 19, 2012, 03:15:28 PM »
I'm against this, because then we notice it we'll have a bazillion diferent subtypes, and then we have to deal with all the effects that care about subtypes, and it's a whole load of paperwork that could've been evaded with just making vampires actual living beings
We really only need two, I think: versions of Dark-Minded and Unliving that can be applied to anything, and which basically just make them not immune to Mind Affecting, and vulnerable to crits (and maybe tweak a few other things). Making up two subtypes is a lot easier than rewriting every monster that is screwed up because of the type rule blanket immunities that make no sense.
Wouldn't it be easier to add subtypes that grant immunities? That way the name of the subtype could explain where the immunity comes from. Most Oozes should have the type Aberration (amorphous, mindless) or something.

Offline phaedrusxy

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 10708
  • The iconic spambot
    • View Profile
Re: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming
« Reply #34 on: October 19, 2012, 03:17:48 PM »
I'm against this, because then we notice it we'll have a bazillion diferent subtypes, and then we have to deal with all the effects that care about subtypes, and it's a whole load of paperwork that could've been evaded with just making vampires actual living beings
We really only need two, I think: versions of Dark-Minded and Unliving that can be applied to anything, and which basically just make them not immune to Mind Affecting, and vulnerable to crits (and maybe tweak a few other things). Making up two subtypes is a lot easier than rewriting every monster that is screwed up because of the type rule blanket immunities that make no sense.
Wouldn't it be easier to add subtypes that grant immunities? That way the name of the subtype could explain where the immunity comes from. Most Oozes should have the type Aberration (amorphous, mindless) or something.
Hmm... You'd have to go and rewrite the creature types (to remove immunities, etc), but yes this could work, and is a better alternative to adding subtypes which remove them.

So remove the Mind-Affecting immunity parts of the construct, vermin, and undead types, then create a Mindless subtype, and say it applies to any creature which does not have an Int score?





Edit: Totally unrelated awesome idea I had for how to get floating islands/castles/etc which seems to fit thematically with what you're going for here ("epic" stuff) (from here):   
Quote
Have them be the tops of mountains/buttes that actually mostly exist in another plane (the Ethereal?). The "floating" parts are just what happens to exist on the Prime. They could even move relative to the Prime if their primary plane moves relative to the Prime, but their motion would be pretty much immutable. Trying to stop one would be as difficult as trying to move a "normal" mountain.

This would let you have "floating" castles and stuff, but not rocks that you could craft into flying suits of armor or use as ships.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2012, 03:42:20 PM by phaedrusxy »
I don't pee messages into the snow often , but when I do , it's in Cyrillic with Fake Viagra.  Stay frosty my friends.

Offline sirpercival

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 10855
  • you can't escape the miles
    • View Profile
Re: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming
« Reply #35 on: October 19, 2012, 05:02:13 PM »
The other way to have floating things is to make them superconductors.  Then they keep the same height in the magnetic field that they had when they began superconducting.  They would dip and rise with fluctuations in the field, and could be moved relatively easily laterally.

BTW I just saw your edit about too many bonus types.  While I agree, I'm afraid of scope creep beyond the monumental task we've already set ourselves...
I am the assassin of productivity

(member in good standing of the troll-feeders guild)

It's begun — my things have overgrown the previous sig.

Offline phaedrusxy

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 10708
  • The iconic spambot
    • View Profile
Re: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming
« Reply #36 on: October 19, 2012, 08:02:56 PM »
The other way to have floating things is to make them superconductors.  Then they keep the same height in the magnetic field that they had when they began superconducting.  They would dip and rise with fluctuations in the field, and could be moved relatively easily laterally.
I heard a catgirl scream somewhere in the distance...

Quote
BTW I just saw your edit about too many bonus types.  While I agree, I'm afraid of scope creep beyond the monumental task we've already set ourselves...
Bah, why? Just make something that overwrites everything that grants a bonus.

Rules text: There are only 3 bonus types: Enhancement, Morale(?), and Racial (or whatever). If something says it is a type other than one of those, convert it to Enhancement.
I don't pee messages into the snow often , but when I do , it's in Cyrillic with Fake Viagra.  Stay frosty my friends.

Offline sirpercival

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 10855
  • you can't escape the miles
    • View Profile
Re: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming
« Reply #37 on: October 21, 2012, 12:00:56 AM »
Or untyped...
I am the assassin of productivity

(member in good standing of the troll-feeders guild)

It's begun — my things have overgrown the previous sig.

Offline Prime32

  • Over-Underling
  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 2914
    • View Profile
Re: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming
« Reply #38 on: November 28, 2012, 06:27:43 PM »
(click to show/hide)
(click to show/hide)
« Last Edit: February 01, 2013, 11:24:07 AM by Prime32 »

Offline sirpercival

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 10855
  • you can't escape the miles
    • View Profile
Re: Intro, Discussion, & Brainstorming
« Reply #39 on: May 02, 2013, 07:36:51 PM »
We need to get going on this, because I had a campaign idea.
I am the assassin of productivity

(member in good standing of the troll-feeders guild)

It's begun — my things have overgrown the previous sig.