Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - LudicSavant

Pages: [1] 2
1
D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder / Re: When are level adjustments worth it?
« on: February 03, 2016, 11:57:41 PM »
Quote from: awaken_D_M_golem on January 18, 2016, 06:37:01 PM
LA Buy-off math is hard, because math is hard.

I have an old post on LA Buy-off math.  Mostly about retroactively estimating how much the XP River *would* have impacted you when your game isn't starting from level 1.

Quote from: LudicSavant on January 20, 2015, 06:18:44 AM
Thought I'd post this since I couldn't find an intact chart with this information elsewhere.

As many of you already know, XP gain isn't linear (see "Experience is a River").  Just flip your DMG open to page 38, and you’ll see a chart that indicates how XP gain works.  Each time you complete an encounter, you gain an amount of XP based on the challenge rating of the encounter and your level.  If a character of a lower level completes the same challenge, they gain more XP than a higher level character completing the same challenge.  The upshot of this is that XP costs don’t keep you behind the curve permanently.  You can use a ton of abilities with XP costs and never get more than one encounter behind the other PCs, so long as you don’t just spam these abilities (in fact, it’s technically possible to slightly overshoot the XP of other PCs due to getting “overflow XP” from the last encounter of a level).  In other words, you shouldn’t be afraid to craft items or prepare things like Alter Fortune, and if you lose a level for dying you aren’t just permanently screwed.

You can afford to use a few abilities with XP costs and never get more than one encounter behind the other PCs, so long as you don’t just spam these abilities (in fact, it’s technically possible to slightly overshoot the XP of other PCs due to getting “overflow XP” from the last encounter of a level).  In other words, you shouldn’t be afraid to craft items or prepare things like Alter Fortune, and if you lose a level for dying you aren’t just permanently screwed.

Alternatively, you could treat “spams XP cost abilities” as a sort of LA+1 template that you can’t buy off, and use the constant bonus XP from being a level behind to fuel your abilities with XP costs.  This can lead to item crafting characters that have much more wealth than usual, which may be worth staying a level behind for some.

But let's skip to the chase. 

Level Adjustment and the River:

LA tends to be fairly crippling in D&D.  Put simply, odds are that if you have an LA+2 race, the LA+2 race’s benefits likely aren’t worth as much as 2 class levels.  This becomes especially true at higher levels, where it’s unlikely that your LA+2 race’s benefits are worth even one class level.  A common solution is to use the LA buyoff variant in Unearthed Arcana, found here:  http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/races/reducingLevelAdjustments.htm

The benefit of the LA buyoff variant is that you can spend a flat XP cost to “buy off” your LA at certain levels, at which point you’ll start to catch up to your teammates due to the effect of being a level behind.  If you’re playing a game from 1-20, this is pretty straightforward.  However, if you’re starting at, say, level 10, then applying the effect of the XP river and LA buyoff calculations retroactively can be rather non-trivial.  So, to save you time, I’ve done the math for you!  Simply look up what level a “normal” character is starting at, and the following charts will give you your level and XP if you have LA+1 or +2.

LA BUYOFF (LA+1, no racial hit dice)

Calculations done assuming you receive 13⅓  encounters of each CR level, divided amongst 4 players (e.g. standard assumptions according to the DMG). 
If everyone else just hit level X, you are Y (With Z XP)
to Level 1:  You don’t exist
to Level 2:  Level 1 (1,000XP)
to Level 3:  Level 2 (3,000XP)
to Level 4:  Level 3 (3,000XP) (You just bought off your LA!  Now the XP River starts to kick in)
to Level 5:  Level 4 (7,337.5 XP)
to Level 6:  Level 5 (12,512.5 XP)
to Level 7:  Level 6 (19,075 XP)
to Level 8:  Level 7 (26,525 XP)
to Level 9:  Level 8 (34,900XP)
to Level 10:  Level 9 (44,350 XP)
to Level 11:  Level 10 (54,612.5 XP)
to Level 12:  Level 11 (65,912.5 XP)
to Level 13:  Level 13 (78,250 XP)

So, there you have it.  Using the above methodology, LA+1 becomes free by level 13 with LA buyoff.  Differences in the order in which encounters are received can affect your overflow rate and thus change what level you “catch up” at but this should calibrate your expectations.  Note also that even though you won't be permanently caught up until around level 13, you'll spend a while only lagging a couple of encounters behind them.

Examples of worthwhile (yet not wildly broken) LA+1s:  Chaos Gnome, Goliath, Draconic


If your DM allows LA Buyoff, you can expect your Powerful Build to become free by level 13

LA BUYOFF (LA+2, no racial hit dice)

to Level 1:  You don’t exist
to Level 2:  You don’t exist.  I’d say it sucks to be you, but nothing can be you, because you can’t be something that doesn’t exist.
to Level 3:  Level 1 (3000XP)
to Level 4:  Level 2 (6000XP)
to Level 5:  Level 3 (10000XP)
to Level 6:  Level 4 (15000XP)
to Level 7:  Level 5 (21000XP)
to Level 8:  Level 6 (21000 XP) (You just bought off part of your LA and are now ECL 7.  The XP river starts to kick in)
to Level 9:  Level 7 (30687.5XP)
to Level 10:  Level 8 (41037.5XP)
to Level 11:  Level 10 (45,450XP)
(You just bought off your LA again mid-way through here, and are now ECL 10.  You actually manage to ding twice here, but you’re still a level behind your companions)
Note:  By the time everyone else is level 11, you are 1 level behind instead of 2.
to Level 12:  Level 11 (58,750XP)
to Level 13:  Level 12 (72,775XP)
to Level 14:  Level 13 (87,650XP) 
to Level 15:  Level 14 (102,887.5XP) 
to Level 16:  Level 15 (118,787.5XP) 
to Level 17:  Level 16 (135,275XP) 
to Level 18:  Level 17 (152,800XP)
to Level 19:  Level 19 (171,362.5 XP)

LA +2 becomes “free” by level 19.  You are only one level behind your companions by level 11.

Notes:  If the XP rate is faster, or you’re typically facing encounters of higher CR than your own, or there are less PCs in the party, then you’ll tend to get more overflow due to XP coming in larger individual chunks, and you will catch up faster.  If the XP rate is slower, or you’re typically facing encounters of lower CR than your own, or there are more PCs in the party, you’ll tend to get less overflow due to XP coming in smaller individual chunks, and you will catch up slower.

A Note on Ad Hoc XP: 
Many groups don’t like to give out XP by encounter, and indeed the DMG itself offers a few variants for handing out XP.  However, sometimes these groups forget to take the “XP river” into account, and this is rather punitive to characters who fall behind on XP for any reason.  XP costs suddenly become much more onerous, and a character who loses a level from death simply stays behind forever.  For those who want to maintain the ability of players to “catch up” while not worrying about the encounter XP system, a question arises as to how much they should be scaling their XP rewards for lower level characters.

One answer is rather simple.  Simply treat your roleplaying / quest / whatever XP as encounters with a given CR, and reference the encounter table.  If you want smaller or larger chunks of XP, just multiply or divide.  You may want to be careful about handing out larger chunks of XP, however, since this can result in players who are behind getting more overflow XP than usual.  If you are going to hand out XP for entire adventures, you could instead hand it out as if it were “X encounters.”

Cheers,
Ludic

So, LA is definitely worth it at the point where the "XP River" effect makes it free.  However, where exactly that point is varies a bit because of the XP overflow effect.

2
Homebrew and House Rules (D&D) / 3.5 Race Hotfixes
« on: December 05, 2015, 07:10:54 PM »
Goal:  I don't want players to feel like they're being mechanically punished for picking the "wrong" race for conceptual reasons.  I want to expand the amount of competitively viable LA 0 races and make them decent in just about any class.

Balance Reference:  Examples of strong races are Human, Whisper Gnome, Strongheart Halfling, Deep Dwarf, Warforged, Lesser Aasimar, Lesser Tiefling, Elan,, etc.  Heck regular gnomes, halflings, and dwarves are pretty good too.

Half-orcs, half-elves, and sun elves just don't compare.  Same goes for some other popular (though seldom used for PCs) races like Hobgoblins unless you're at a point where LA Buyoff + XP River made them free.

Initial ideas:

Half-Orc: Remove one of the mental penalties (your choice) and gain +1 skill point per level (as a human).  Being able to choose the mental penalty that you remove means that orcs can make viable casters of any core class, even if they still won't be the best. 

Half-Elf:  Gain a bonus feat (as a Human).

Sun Elf: +4 Dexterity instead of +2.

Orc:  Stat adjustments as the Water Orc from Unearthed Arcana, except remove one of the mental penalties (your choice).  Doesn't gain any of the other Water Orc traits (such as 30 ft. Swim speed).  Being able to choose the mental penalty that you remove means that orcs can make viable casters, even if they still won't be the best.

Hobgoblin:  Get +2 Dex or Con, not both.  0 LA.

Drow:  Remove Spell Resistance and one of the mental bonuses (your choice).  The +2 bonus on Will Saves against spells replaces the +2 against enchantments from the base elf, rather than stacking with it.  0 LA. Compare to Lesser Aasimar/Tiefling and note that Con is one of the worse stats to have a penalty to (for pretty much any class).  Also note Light Blindness (not sensitivity, which is both less severe and trivially negated).

Goblins:  Goblins are vicious little guys, and a little bit stronger than halflings or gnomes.  Remove one of their penalties (either Strength or Charisma).  They still aren't going to bench as much as any Medium creature even if they have the same Strength score.

Charismatic Dwarves:  Some dwarves have forceful personalities, but these are often brash or reckless.  A Dwarf may swap out their penalty to Charisma for a penalty to Wisdom.  This is usually a downgrade, but makes the race more open to Bards or Sorcerers.  The idea is similar to how in 5e they offer different "archetypes" for the same race.

How's that look?

3
D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder / Re: Help with a Merchant Build - mastering GP, purchase, sale, UMD
« on: November 14, 2015, 08:42:36 AM »
So, not sure if this is relevant to what you want to accomplish, but I thought you might find it amusing.

So, I just stumbled upon the spell Unseen Crafter.  Unseen Crafter is a level 2 spell in Races of Eberron that lasts 1 day/level and creates a servant who can make crafting checks for you.  A mid-level caster can potentially cast this spell enough to have a legion of craftsmen (hundreds!).  They can all be making, I don't know, Salvo poisons.  In which case, combine with this:  http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=4849.0  But really they can make anything.

With a +6 to your casting stat (not hard at mid-levels), +2 from equipping them with artisan's tools, and a +2 from having them work in a workshop, they can hit the masterwork DCs for all Craft skills without you having any ranks in any Craft skills.

So, say you have 200 Unseen Crafters, each making DC20 Craft checks (for any craft skill) while taking 10.  It's a one man factory enterprise.  Maybe something to put in that stronghold, and give you a small mountain of stuff to sell with your mercantile skills?   :tongue

4
D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder / Re: Spells that you would typically ban from a campaign?
« on: November 14, 2015, 08:31:19 AM »
Some spells I ban and frequently see banned:

 Venomfire, Streamers, Consumptive Field (both versions), Shivering Touch, Celerity (all of the versions), Wings of Cover, Ice Assassin, Power Word: Pain, Gate, Simulacrum, Guidance of the Avatar.

5
D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder / Re: Tanking Analysis in D&D (or why we've been giving up on that party role)
« on: August 08, 2015, 04:32:46 PM »
Peeling, rather than "aggro," is the main thing people should be talking about, I think, especially since getting enemies to attack you isn't the only way to peel.  Melee fighters in D&D tend to be rather awful at peeling anything that isn't ALSO melee, and even then they're generally not great at it (heck, D&D squishies are often superior at peeling).  Certainly not on a par with the tanking designs you see in well designed PvP games.

6
D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder / Re: Tanking Analysis in D&D (or why we've been giving up on that party role)
« on: August 07, 2015, 12:52:40 PM »
I play League of Legends rather than DotA for my MOBA fix.  There, tanks clearly work, but they also do a number of things that aren't done well by many D&D tanks, as well as some factors that don't really come into play in D&D.

A few of the things make tanks important there:

1)  The presence of turrets and other AI foes (such as Baron or Dragon) which do a great deal of damage, and their targets can be easily decided by your own actions.  Someone needs to take the turret damage if you want to dive people under a turret, so simply having the durability to do that gives your team some offensive utility.  In D&D, there is no equivalent to turret shots.  Enemies need an actual reason to want to target a guy with the highest tanky stats.  That's okay, because tanks are pretty relevant to fights that don't go on around turrets and the like, too!

2)  Peel.  Sure, the enemy might try to dive your ADC (your squishy ranged guy who hits like a truck but will die in a stiff breeze... the person you want to tank for, essentially), but many tanks in League have ways to make you stop attacking that target... often as simple as being able to slow your movement speed while the ADC just moves backwards a bit, because ability ranges aren't crazy high like in D&D and kiting and positioning remains very important.  Simply interposing yourself between the squishy and the enemy is enough to block most skillshots.

By contrast, in D&D melee characters tend to struggle to actually interfere with projectiles or keep enemies from being able to use their ranged attacks or combos.  A Fireball is going to be able to target anyone on the field.  If the opponent can cast it at all, they can probably cast it across the full range of the battlemap as long as there aren't walls in the way.

3)  If the enemy focuses you, your team is at an advantage.  This doesn't necessarily mean you can take the entire enemy team's damage output, as the OP suggests, because this isn't the case for many tanks in League of Legends (at least, if neither team has a huge XP/Gold lead).  It means that if they use all of their attacks on you, your team comes out with a massive advantage and will win the encounter.

So, why does it produce an advantage for enemies to attack you?  Well, it may mean a number of things.   It may mean that your allies go unharassed and are able to pull off a nasty combo uninterrupted.  In may mean that enemies have bunched into a disadvantageous position to deal with you.  It may mean that they actually take damage or interrupts simply for hitting you.  But almost all the time, one simple factor applies:  Enemy damage output is not constant.  If enemies blow their abilities, they have to wait for them to cool down before they can use them again. So, maybe that enemy mage might have been able to take your squishy from 100-0 with one half-second combo, but his ability to do that won't be up for another 6 seconds... giving ample time for your squishy mage to sidle into position without fear and blow him up.

4)  In League, it's worth it for you to die to kill off several enemies in a teamfight.  In D&D, losing even one party member is often considered a major failure.  This is partially remedied by resurrection spells, but those leave an unsatisfying taste for many.  This could be remedied for D&D by having more "degrees of failure," but that could take up another entire topic on its own so I won't really get into that.

5)  Threat when ignored.  This is necessary for 3 to be relevant.  This isn't necessarily damage... after all, some tanky champions have so little damage that, if they show up on their own, you can almost completely ignore their existence.  Alistar, for instance, is a very effective tank (considered high tier character currently) that tends to fit this mold with his most popular builds.  However, with a teammate around, these characters without damage of their own tend to create fantastic opportunities for their ALLIES to deal damage, while receiving little in return.

That said, many DO project a great deal of offensive threat and can kill your entire team if left unharassed.  This tends to be balanced by the fact that heavy-hitting tanks can be easily cced and kited... at the cost of, of course, having to focus on them instead of some squishier target, or letting them zone you out.

6)  Now, you can't really take the entire enemy team's damage on the chin.  While it can be possible to do this if you're fed or if the enemy team composition is terrible and you got to build full armor against an all AD tea or something, these are cases where the game is basically already won for your side (barring crucial tactical errors for your team).  Even the most durable aren't going to be able to take the full force of the enemy team's offense for more than a brief period of time. 

However, it's important to note that it's not actually easy for the enemy team to focus all of their efforts on only one person during a teamfight, due to positioning, kiting, ranges, cc, interrupts, being in a position to land skillshots, etc.  Often you will be able to survive diving into the entire enemy team... as long as others of your team are there to support you.  This is simply because focusing you to death becomes an undesirable or impossible strategy due to everything that's going on in a teamfight.

7
Min/Max 3.x / Re: LA Buyoff chart using the XP River (LA+1 is free by level 13, LA+2 by 19)
« on: January 20, 2015, 06:52:07 AM »
Quote from: Jackinthegreen on January 20, 2015, 06:48:47 AM
I wouldn't recommend using Lolth-touched as an example LA+1.  It's only for chaotic evil characters after all.

Sure, whatever.  Consider it stricken from the examples.

8
Min/Max 3.x / LA Buyoff chart using the XP River (LA+1 is free by level 13, LA+2 by 19)
« on: January 20, 2015, 06:18:44 AM »
Thought I'd post this since I couldn't find an intact chart with this information elsewhere.

As many of you already know, XP gain isn't linear (see "Experience is a River").  Just flip your DMG open to page 38, and you’ll see a chart that indicates how XP gain works.  Each time you complete an encounter, you gain an amount of XP based on the challenge rating of the encounter and your level.  If a character of a lower level completes the same challenge, they gain more XP than a higher level character completing the same challenge.  The upshot of this is that XP costs don’t keep you behind the curve permanently.  You can use a ton of abilities with XP costs and never get more than one encounter behind the other PCs, so long as you don’t just spam these abilities (in fact, it’s technically possible to slightly overshoot the XP of other PCs due to getting “overflow XP” from the last encounter of a level).  In other words, you shouldn’t be afraid to craft items or prepare things like Alter Fortune, and if you lose a level for dying you aren’t just permanently screwed.

You can afford to use a few abilities with XP costs and never get more than one encounter behind the other PCs, so long as you don’t just spam these abilities (in fact, it’s technically possible to slightly overshoot the XP of other PCs due to getting “overflow XP” from the last encounter of a level).  In other words, you shouldn’t be afraid to craft items or prepare things like Alter Fortune, and if you lose a level for dying you aren’t just permanently screwed.

Alternatively, you could treat “spams XP cost abilities” as a sort of LA+1 template that you can’t buy off, and use the constant bonus XP from being a level behind to fuel your abilities with XP costs.  This can lead to item crafting characters that have much more wealth than usual, which may be worth staying a level behind for some.

But let's skip to the chase. 

Level Adjustment and the River:

LA tends to be fairly crippling in D&D.  Put simply, odds are that if you have an LA+2 race, the LA+2 race’s benefits likely aren’t worth as much as 2 class levels.  This becomes especially true at higher levels, where it’s unlikely that your LA+2 race’s benefits are worth even one class level.  A common solution is to use the LA buyoff variant in Unearthed Arcana, found here:  http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/races/reducingLevelAdjustments.htm

The benefit of the LA buyoff variant is that you can spend a flat XP cost to “buy off” your LA at certain levels, at which point you’ll start to catch up to your teammates due to the effect of being a level behind.  If you’re playing a game from 1-20, this is pretty straightforward.  However, if you’re starting at, say, level 10, then applying the effect of the XP river and LA buyoff calculations retroactively can be rather non-trivial.  So, to save you time, I’ve done the math for you!  Simply look up what level a “normal” character is starting at, and the following charts will give you your level and XP if you have LA+1 or +2.

LA BUYOFF (LA+1, no racial hit dice)

Calculations done assuming you receive 13⅓  encounters of each CR level, divided amongst 4 players (e.g. standard assumptions according to the DMG). 
If everyone else just hit level X, you are Y (With Z XP)
to Level 1:  You don’t exist
to Level 2:  Level 1 (1,000XP)
to Level 3:  Level 2 (3,000XP)
to Level 4:  Level 3 (3,000XP) (You just bought off your LA!  Now the XP River starts to kick in)
to Level 5:  Level 4 (7,337.5 XP)
to Level 6:  Level 5 (12,512.5 XP)
to Level 7:  Level 6 (19,075 XP)
to Level 8:  Level 7 (26,525 XP)
to Level 9:  Level 8 (34,900XP)
to Level 10:  Level 9 (44,350 XP)
to Level 11:  Level 10 (54,612.5 XP)
to Level 12:  Level 11 (65,912.5 XP)
to Level 13:  Level 13 (78,250 XP)

So, there you have it.  Using the above methodology, LA+1 becomes free by level 13 with LA buyoff.  Differences in the order in which encounters are received can affect your overflow rate and thus change what level you “catch up” at but this should calibrate your expectations.  Note also that even though you won't be permanently caught up until around level 13, you'll spend a while only lagging a couple of encounters behind them.

Examples of worthwhile (yet not wildly broken) LA+1s:  Chaos Gnome, Goliath, Draconic


If your DM allows LA Buyoff, you can expect your Powerful Build to become free by level 13

LA BUYOFF (LA+2, no racial hit dice)

to Level 1:  You don’t exist
to Level 2:  You don’t exist.  I’d say it sucks to be you, but nothing can be you, because you can’t be something that doesn’t exist.
to Level 3:  Level 1 (3000XP)
to Level 4:  Level 2 (6000XP)
to Level 5:  Level 3 (10000XP)
to Level 6:  Level 4 (15000XP)
to Level 7:  Level 5 (21000XP)
to Level 8:  Level 6 (21000 XP) (You just bought off part of your LA and are now ECL 7.  The XP river starts to kick in)
to Level 9:  Level 7 (30687.5XP)
to Level 10:  Level 8 (41037.5XP)
to Level 11:  Level 10 (45,450XP)
(You just bought off your LA again mid-way through here, and are now ECL 10.  You actually manage to ding twice here, but you’re still a level behind your companions)
Note:  By the time everyone else is level 11, you are 1 level behind instead of 2.
to Level 12:  Level 11 (58,750XP)
to Level 13:  Level 12 (72,775XP)
to Level 14:  Level 13 (87,650XP) 
to Level 15:  Level 14 (102,887.5XP) 
to Level 16:  Level 15 (118,787.5XP) 
to Level 17:  Level 16 (135,275XP) 
to Level 18:  Level 17 (152,800XP)
to Level 19:  Level 19 (171,362.5 XP)

LA +2 becomes “free” by level 19.  You are only one level behind your companions by level 11.

Notes:  If the XP rate is faster, or you’re typically facing encounters of higher CR than your own, or there are less PCs in the party, then you’ll tend to get more overflow due to XP coming in larger individual chunks, and you will catch up faster.  If the XP rate is slower, or you’re typically facing encounters of lower CR than your own, or there are more PCs in the party, you’ll tend to get less overflow due to XP coming in smaller individual chunks, and you will catch up slower.

A Note on Ad Hoc XP: 
Many groups don’t like to give out XP by encounter, and indeed the DMG itself offers a few variants for handing out XP.  However, sometimes these groups forget to take the “XP river” into account, and this is rather punitive to characters who fall behind on XP for any reason.  XP costs suddenly become much more onerous, and a character who loses a level from death simply stays behind forever.  For those who want to maintain the ability of players to “catch up” while not worrying about the encounter XP system, a question arises as to how much they should be scaling their XP rewards for lower level characters.

One answer is rather simple.  Simply treat your roleplaying / quest / whatever XP as encounters with a given CR, and reference the encounter table.  If you want smaller or larger chunks of XP, just multiply or divide.  You may want to be careful about handing out larger chunks of XP, however, since this can result in players who are behind getting more overflow XP than usual.  If you are going to hand out XP for entire adventures, you could instead hand it out as if it were “X encounters.”

Cheers,
Ludic

9
D&D 5e / Re: D&D 5th edition Next - PHB
« on: July 18, 2014, 03:57:27 PM »
Quote from: Captnq on July 17, 2014, 09:39:15 AM
I'm stopping here.

Why? Because I figured out what's been annoying me.

Here's what I want for this game:

50 Domains.
1000 spells.
600 feats
minimum of 15 different options for every base class.
20 base classes.

Before you tell me, "That's allot to ask" my answer is, I already got twice as much in 3.5
  How many of those in 3.5e are actually useful though?  Many spells are reprints or of similar function (with one spell being clearly the best version).  Many domains are similar or bad.  There are tons of trap feats that might as well not exist (Some make Toughness look like a bargain).  The base classes question is the one that seems to have the least objective value, though, because some classes have significantly more versatility in build and can even contain others (for instance, the "Wizard" can make tons of completely different types of characters, whereas a Beguiler is much more limited, and lower tier classes even more limited.  The "Cleric" class can make a better Paladin than the Paladin, and still make a dozen other things.  Conceivably it would even be possible to create a class that could build all other classes).

This isn't a rhetorical question.  I actually want and would use an answer.

10
General D&D Discussion / Re: Thought Experiment: Name that society's alignment
« on: July 17, 2014, 08:39:22 AM »
Removing alignment entirely is a possibility.  Or, perhaps a less-intrusive goal would be to remove alignment from all things that don't have "special alignment auras."  In that case, one must ask "what do we do about those mechanics which depend on it?"

The important effects are... lessee... Protection from X, Detect X, and the Word line.  If there are any important ones I'm forgetting, lemme know.

- Alignment restrictions for acquiring features, generally speaking, can go the way of the dodo without impacting much of anything.  Paladins no longer have alignment requirements but do have codes of conduct.  I recommend defining new codes of conduct rather than using the existing ones, since queries like "evil acts" return "undefined."

- Protection from X spell could perhaps become reflavored as a sort of "Planar / Possession Ward" spell.  It prevents summoned extraplanar creatures from entering an area, it provides an AC bonus against anything not native to the caster's plane or summoned, undead, clerics, paladins, and it suppresses attempts to control you (compulsions and such).  Maybe make it interact with Eberron's possession rules.  The most important part of PfX is the suppression of compulsions, so it's important to keep that part intact, and that seems to fit with the "possession ward" flavor.

- Detect X becomes "detect clerics/paladins/blackguards/outsiders/undead/deathless" or more simply "detect aligned auras / aligned energy channeling."  Clerics ping as the alignment of their deities, regardless of their own personalities.  Paladins / Blackguards / etc all ping as the alignment of their aura.  Deathless always ping Good, other undead always ping Evil, Outsiders ping of their respective alignments.  Anyone who doesn't have a deity (or has a neutral aligned deity) who can turn undead pings Good, and vice versa for Rebuke Undead.

- Holy Word / Blasphemy / Dictum / Word of Chaos simply affect all beings not from your plane that don't share your deity's aligned aura.  If a balor does it on the material plane, he's hitting everyone except for, say, clerics of Erythnul.

- Radiant Charge / Doom Charge / Tide of Chaos / Law Bearer can simply work on any sentient enemies whom you have a specific moral disagreement with (e.g. you must know something, even if it is a minor or generalized detail, about the target.  You can't use it on random peasants).  Radiant charge may work on undead/evil outsiders, Doom charge may work on Deathless/good outsiders.  To qualify to have these maneuvers, your deity's alignment must be within one step of the maneuver's alignment requirement.

- Aura of Chaos / Perfect Order / Tyranny / Triumph stances make you ping as if you were a cleric of a god of those alignments.  Aura of Triumph simply procs against all targets.

- Smite works on everything.  No I don't care that this is a buff, Paladins are a low tier class.

11
General D&D Discussion / Re: Thought Experiment: Name that society's alignment
« on: July 17, 2014, 04:27:10 AM »
One of the somewhat more salvageable ways of handling Law vs Chaos I've used was essentially (to put it briefly) to turn the question of "is this person lawful or chaotic" into the question of..."When the rights of few and the needs/desires of the many conflict, which side do you tend to take?" 

In that case, the compromises in the Constitution could probably be seen as Chaotic, yes.  Although, I don't really see any value in bothering to define acts or societies by alignment.  The only things you need to define by alignment for use with the default D&D rules are targets.

So, you need to know what someone Detects as, you need to know what things get blasted by Blasphemy, you need to know what things you get AC bonuses against when you use Protection from Alignment.  But you don't need to know whether a given law is Chaotic or Lawful.

12
General D&D Discussion / Re: Thought Experiment: Name that society's alignment
« on: July 16, 2014, 12:04:41 PM »
Not that Exalted means anything either.  Half of the definitions they give in that book simply use synonyms for Good like "benevolence" or "righteousness" with no definitional value and the other half are either things that are about as meaningful as "your special effects are a different color" or things that just flat out cause Int damage to the reader like Ravages.

13
General D&D Discussion / Re: Thought Experiment: Name that society's alignment
« on: July 16, 2014, 04:05:04 AM »
Quote from: RelentlessImp on July 16, 2014, 03:25:48 AM
Quote from: LudicSavant on July 16, 2014, 03:01:10 AM
Actually, in this thread alone, with only 7 answering replies from a relatively close-knit community, I see 5 different alignments listed for society A.  Society B also included CE, CG, LE, LN, and LG (5 alignments from 7 respondents, covering all 4 extreme alignments!).  That's a plainly horrific batting average, and clearly illustrates the point that with the alignment rules as written in the PHB, people are doing little more than playing a vague word association game where they just throw on a label however they feel like it, and players in game will have no idea what they can cast Dictum on without actually throwing down a detect spell even if they have intimate knowledge of the intended target's personality.

Yes, but see, the difference is, my answers are right.  :lmao

While I understand that you're joking, I think it would be more precise to say that none of the given answers were right, because the alignment labels as defined by the PHB don't actually differentiate from each other.  That's the core problem, really.  For alignments to have meaning, people must add their own definitions.  The fact that they often do this without realizing they're adding their own definitions (as opposed to referring to a perceived common definition established in the rulebooks) is why alignments cause more stupid arguments than anything else in D&D.

The argument of "what does X alignment mean" or "what alignment is X" is akin to the ongoing philosophical argument as to whether "when a tree falls in the forest with nobody around to hear it, does it make a sound?"  To a serious philosopher, the answer is obvious.  However, despite the answer being obvious, the "classic" question is still taken seriously by some people who didn't get the memo, and still causes pointless debates today.

The obvious answer is thus:  The two sides answering "yes" and "no" and eternally going at each others' throats aren't actually arguing about the same thing.  One side is asking "if a tree falls in the forest with nobody around to hear it, does it make a sonic vibration?" and correctly concluding yes.  The other side is asking "if a tree falls in the forest with nobody around to hear it, does anyone experience an auditory sensation?"  and correctly concluding no.  The argument is thus a false one:  Both sides would probably agree on the answers of the two questions I just listed, but they won't agree on the original question because they don't realize that they haven't properly defined the question. 

D&D 3.5e alignment arguments are generally the same way:  People are really asking different questions (like "is this action defying the laws of the land" or "is this action organized" or "is this action rational" or Bhu's "does this society keep to themselves" or any of a thousand other questions), because they have totally different definitions of what each alignment means, yet are treating the discussion as if they're answering the same questions.

14
General D&D Discussion / Re: Thought Experiment: Name that society's alignment
« on: July 16, 2014, 03:01:10 AM »
Quote from: Leviathan on July 16, 2014, 02:37:27 AM
The thing with anarchism (or communism, or many similar movements) is that it involves two stages. In the first stage, the existing system is torn down or removed, which is clearly a chaotic act. In the second stage, a new order arises; this new order is often lawful and almost never chaotic.

Except neither of those things are clearly chaotic or lawful.

Before you can have a real discussion of what alignment something is, you have to define terms.  As is, Chaotic and Lawful have useless definitions in the PHB, and therefore mean absolutely nothing.  You could describe essentially any action as Chaotic or Lawful... or even as both a paragon of law and a paragon of chaos at the same time.

I would not be surprised if you could post your societies on various internet forum communities and get answers for every alignment for both of them, Libertad.  And that, right there, should illustrate the problem with the PHB alignment definitions.

Actually, in this thread alone, with only 7 answering replies from a relatively close-knit community, I see 5 different alignments listed for society A.  Society B also included CE, CG, LE, LN, and LG (5 alignments from 7 respondents, covering all 4 extreme alignments!).  That's a plainly horrific batting average, and clearly illustrates the point that with the alignment rules as written in the PHB, people are doing little more than playing a vague word association game where they just throw on a label however they feel like it, and players in game will have no idea what they can cast Dictum on without actually throwing down a detect spell even if they have intimate knowledge of the intended target's personality.

It's not even that the idea of alignment is that bad.  It wouldn't actually be that hard to write more consistent and useful definitions.  It's just that in the PHB it's written really, really badly... to the point of being utterly meaningless and arbitrary.

15
Min/Max 3.x / Re: comparing costs of healing, staff vs wand of lesser vigor
« on: July 05, 2014, 06:57:10 PM »
Good point.  Guess that's what I get for just looking at the lists and not the PrC itself while spelldiving.

16
Min/Max 3.x / Re: What is a good Arcane Warrior (not Duskblade)
« on: July 05, 2014, 06:48:47 PM »
Wizards.  Even straight-class wizards are great with the right spell choices.  No, really.  Sorcerers also qualify.  The secret here is to remember just how little BAB actually matters.

Bards.  Several ways to go about it, some of which include:
- Straight bard with echoblades and so forth.
- Bard / Swordsage.  Maybe see the "Captain Charisma" CharOp showcase build.
- Bardsader or Bardblade:  Just add Song of the White Raven.
- Bard 6 / Crusader 2 (get thicket of blades at 8!) / Jade Phoenix Mage 2 / Sublime Chord 2 / Jade Phoenix Mage 8

17
Min/Max 3.x / Re: comparing costs of healing, staff vs wand of lesser vigor
« on: July 04, 2014, 09:06:57 PM »
Fun fact:  Runescarred berserkers get Cure Moderate Wounds as a level 1 spell.  Other classes can borrow things off of PrC lists, then make wands.

A wand of Cure Moderate Wounds has an average healing of 10, which is only 1 less than a Lesser Vigor wand.  The difference is that it applies this healing in 1 round, which means that the amount of time you spend between combats healing is shorter.  This is occasionally relevant, since the sounds of your battle might have raised an alarm or something, and you don't want to wait.  It also means that you're not putting as much strain on your buff durations.  Ultimately, what it loses (slightly) in gp/hp efficiency, it makes up for in reduced downtime before you're fully ready for the next encounter.

18
General D&D Discussion / Re: Hit Points: Why do people hate human toughness, but love inhuman reflexes?
« on: June 19, 2014, 04:02:57 AM »
It all goes back to the "Fighters can't have nice things" mentality.  It doesn't apply to everyone... I'm perfectly fine with insane durability.

Quote from: oslecamo on May 23, 2014, 08:57:29 AM
Even arrow catching is nothing more than a myth

Just thought you would want to know:

The show you linked later recanted after a guy showed up on their show and started catching arrows.  They did a second arrow-catching episode about it and everything, where they admitted that they were wrong and that the little experiment you linked was flawed on a basic conceptual level, for all of the obvious reasons.

You really shouldn't give the Mythbusters too much credit.  I appreciate the spirit of their show and the practical reasons they do their work the way they do it, but at the end of the day they don't engage in basic standards of scientific rigor, and therefore their conclusions are frequently unreliable.  You should always double check your sources when you see such demonstrations on TV.

19
Play By Post / Re: Need one more player for a 4th level Eberron game.
« on: June 18, 2014, 02:19:02 PM »
I suppose I'm too late for this one?

20
Min/Max 3.x / Re: Questions about Burrowing and Usable Tunnels
« on: June 08, 2014, 05:16:18 AM »
Quote from: linklord231 on June 08, 2014, 03:12:31 AM
Normally, you couldn't do this.  It would require moving through an enemy-occupied square, which is not allowed (unless you're tumbling, which is... odd, in this situation).

Why would you need to move through an enemy occupied square?  Just have that umber hulk move into the square *under* them and bam, 10x10 pit created immediately under you.

Pages: [1] 2