|
JUST MAKING CHILI posted:If magic/psionics transparency is in effect, get a ring of spell storing or bracelets of spell sharing, store expansion in it and give it to someone else. With Scribe Tattoo you can make an Expansion tattoo onto someone else, but at double the cost of a normal tattoo.
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 19:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 05:47 |
|
|
Summon Monster 7 lets you summon a Babau, and at that point you should have a caster level in the teens, so summon length will last most of any fight. Spell Compendium has Summon Babau Demon as a 6th level spell, but with a duration of concentration up to 1 round/level + 1 round. Babau's are OK at 7th (but probably replaceable by Arrow Demons from MM3) but good at 6th. Dispel Magic and See Invisibility at will (CL 7th), three melee attacks and 2d6 sneak attack, not a bad little roguelike summon. Similarly, Summon Monster 5 lets you summon a Bearded Devil, or you can replace it with a Black Abshai - a pretty even trade. Spell Compendium has Summon Bearded Devil as a 5th level spell, same concentration duration as above. I think that's a pretty good spell to pick up if you want both the Bearded Devil and Abshai, but devoting one spell to a single monster is pretty crap. Is there any reason to not take the Summon Babau/Bearded spells (I'm an Archivist and can learn mostly anything I can get my hands on)? Is concentration duration really that big of a deal breaker? Assume Swift Concentration skill trick and maxed out Concentration.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
Swift Concentration works for one turn, out of however many you want to use the spell for. Also you still can't cast spells while concentrating on a spell. Why does Summon Bearded Devil even exist? It's at the same level Summon Monster gives Bearded Devils, but with a worse duration and no versatility? I wouldn't waste the ink, even as an Archivist. Summon Babau Demon is at least a lower level spell.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
Concentration spells in general are pretty bad unless you grab Sonorous Hum (3rd lv spell, takes over concentration of one spell for you) and even then they're kind of awkward without that time to prep. I personally wouldn't take either of them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
Nihilarian posted:Swift Concentration works for one turn, out of however many you want to use the spell for. Also you still can't cast spells while concentrating on a spell. Why does Summon Bearded Devil even exist? It's at the same level Summon Monster gives Bearded Devils, but with a worse duration and no versatility? Bearded Devils come off the Summon Monster V list. Summon Bearded Devil is a level 4 spell.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
Eikre posted:Bearded Devils come off the Summon Monster V list. Summon Bearded Devil is a level 4 spell. I wouldn't go out of my way for either spell, personally
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:59
|
|
|
Summon Bearded Devil is definitely a cleric 5 spell in Spell Compendium but yeah, not worth it based on what we just talked about even if it was Cleric 4.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
I've come across in my readings that supposedly ranged builds and "multi-hit" builds like dual-wielders and Flurry of Blows types lose out in 3.5 mechanics because DR is applied on every hit, and those kinds of characters rely on lots of small hits rather than fewer high-damage ones. Has this ever become enough of an issue for y'all to be noticed? Have you ever tried to houserule anything about it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 17:35
|
|
|
There's a couple things working against dual wielding. Besides the DR thing, the biggest thing is that two handed weapons have Power Attack. In addition, dual wielders have to spend extra feats, pump an extra stat, and pay twice as much for weaponry. There's basically no reason to go dual wielding unless you get bonus damage on every attack (sneak attack/skirmish/etc) or are a ranger (who gets free dual wielding feats without having to pump dexterity and bonus damage against some enemies)
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 17:46
|
|
|
Plus there's the inherent logistical issues of rolling a shitload of attack & damage rolls, sorting out the hits, and totaling the damage. It's less of a pain online, but it's still always gonna be there in a larger quantity than "roll one attack, roll your fuckhuge damage once, done." In other news, I've been pondering this for a while: what knowledge skills would you assign the various natural sciences to? Because it comes up enough for me to notice and think about, but I always feel like I'm just kludging a skill in to fit. I generally run it like this: Arcana: Chemistry Planes: Astronomy, Physics Geology & other Earth Sciences: Nature Biology is split up amongst the knowledges as a function of the "ID a monster" roll. Am I missing any big/important fields? I sometimes want to add a "Knowledge: Mundane Sciences" skill or blend it into Knowledge: AEC but that always felt awkward since I'd expect someone who deals with mucking about with the fabric of reality to also understand how it works a little bit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
Archers should never have to deal with DR, because every archer should have either Hank's Energy Bow or a Force Bow (MIC, somewhere).
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
Yawgmoth posted:Plus there's the inherent logistical issues of rolling a shitload of attack & damage rolls, sorting out the hits, and totaling the damage. It's less of a pain online, but it's still always gonna be there in a larger quantity than "roll one attack, roll your fuckhuge damage once, done." Astronomy should be Arcana for sure. Wizards look at the stars for a reason! e: Physics should probs be either Knowledge (Engineering/Architecture) and Knowledge (Planes). Earth sciences probs Knowledge (Geography) or Knowledge (Nature). Chemistry feels wierd for Arcana, but I guess you can't expect player character to have Craft (Alchemy) really. fool of sound fucked around with this message at 19:04 on Dec 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:Astronomy should be Arcana for sure. Wizards look at the stars for a reason! I guess I could be lazy on it and say "give me a knowledge roll for physics and justify that skill before you roll." 
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
Knowledge skills are only applicable towards things that people actually know, so frequently, the answer is that you do not. Optics, relativity, and the periodic table are just not items of inquiry that are available in any book or school, much less any DC 30 check. If you're running a post-scholastic society and game world where these things come up and have any kind of relevance to the adventuring lifestyle (not to mention an ontology that accepts the findings of our own natural philosophy, in the first place) then the knowledge skills just need to be restructured outright to reflect not only the extra information but also the academic structure which are likely to propagate that information onto people's class skill lists. If, on the other hand, Wizards retain their stranglehold on the academic process, then literally everything that can't be opportunistically justified in the other categories gets tossed in Arcana. Seriously. Just like the dragons and poo poo. Has nothing to do with those inquiries being structurally related, just the fact that the assholes with spellbooks have a monopoly on the colleges and associations where people go to talk about those things. Chemistry absolutely goes in with Alchemy. The fact that the book-knowledge would be limited to the people who also have practical utility in creating actual compounds is entirely deliberate.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 23:26
|
|
|
Well yes, if you're running a game where science is emphatically Not A Thing, you wouldn't care and wouldn't even ask the question to start. But I am not and thus I am asking the question. If you're not aware, Eberron is very much a post-WW1 Europe style world. People go to government-funded school as a matter of course, most people are literate in at least one language, there's magitech trains, airships, and street lamps around in notable quantities, and so on. Eikre posted:then the knowledge skills just need to be restructured outright
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 18:12
|
|
|
Yawgmoth posted:Yes that is what I am asking for input on. Because I would like the PCs to know these things in character, and I don't want to tell them to rejigger their characters sheets in the middle of the game to accommodate the idea and "pick a skill for [science], tell me why it fits, and roll it" feels kind of kludgy to me. Do something like "house rule: Get ranks in a science skill every level equal to your Int mod" in order to get around 3.5's limitations in this area.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
I could see Astronomy as a function of Planes, but that's mainly because my ideal D&D setting is one where there is no differentiation, either physical or metaphysical, between the different planes of existence and different planets. Depending on whether your setting subscribes to laws of nature like our reality I could see the various sciences falling into either Arcana, Planes, Nature or Religion. Actually, thinking up which sciences correspond to which knowledge skill would be an interesting exercise in world-building: if you say that Astronomy falls under Arcana, what is that saying about the world? Obviously it says that Wizards like to look at the stars, but why? Are the various celestial bodies somehow magical? What does it say about the stars when Arcana is also the knowledge skill that is used for monster knowledge about aberrations? If, on the other hand, you decide that Astronomy is a function of Nature, it pretty clearly indicates that the stars behave according to natural pattern and have a clear relationship with the passage of seasons, but it also means that Druids and Rangers are somehow assumed to be better at Astronomy (which might not be that big of a stretch: 5 ranks in Nature gives you a +2 synergy bonus to Survival, which might indicate that a knowledge of Astronomy means that you're better navigating your environment thanks to your knowledge of the stars).
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2016 09:35
|
|
|
Yawgmoth posted:If you're not aware, Eberron is very much a post-WW1 Europe style world. People go to government-funded school as a matter of course, most people are literate in at least one language, there's magitech trains, airships, and street lamps around in notable quantities, and so on. That doesn't mean they have post-Newtonian science. They make those airships by building a big loving wooden galleon and then enslaving a living entity to move it around, not by understanding jack poo poo about how the world works beyond "Draw Summoning Circle -> This Elemental Is Your Bitch." The street lamps may as well be the providence of a Roman pottery factory. Yeah, they're industrialized and literate, but the foundation of all of their "technology" is disjointed chanting of magic words and being born with loving tattoos. Dudes can brew as much willow tea and make as much black powder as they want, it doesn't mean they're practicing chemistry. Yawgmoth posted:
"Restructuring outright" precludes your second desire so maybe it's not the foregone conclusion you seem to be saying it is? Regardless, one way to do it might be: Arts and Literature (legends, history, archeology, music, linguistics) Astrology (the planes, astronomy, psionics, chakras, elementals, incorporeal undead, outsider physiology) Chemistry (metallurgy, medicine, poison, explosives) Cryptobiology (aberrations, oozes, magical beasts, corporeal undead, dragon physiology) Ecology (terrain, climate, animals, vermin, plants, fey) Logic (philosophy, ethics, math, computation) Mysteries (practical theology, magical folkways, arcane societies, secret truths, inquiries defying determinism, the customs of fey, dragons, and outsiders) Physics (architecture, machines, engineering, optics, motion, constructs) Society (cultures, politics, economics, important people, the customs of humanoids, monstrous humanoids and giants) Eikre fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Dec 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2016 19:30
|
|
|
Eikre posted:That doesn't mean they have post-Newtonian science. They make those airships by building a big loving wooden galleon and then enslaving a living entity to move it around, not by understanding jack poo poo about how the world works beyond "Draw Summoning Circle -> This Elemental Is Your Bitch." The street lamps may as well be the providence of a Roman pottery factory. Yeah, they're industrialized and literate, but the foundation of all of their "technology" is disjointed chanting of magic words and being born with loving tattoos. If you're making black powder, you are practicing chemistry. Maybe the terminology is a bit different in-world, but it's chemistry. Just like if you're making an aircraft more efficient, you are practicing aerodynamics, whether if it's a 747 or a fire elemental bound airship. quote:"Restructuring outright" precludes your second desire so maybe it's not the foregone conclusion you seem to be saying it is?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
Okay there is, like, a phenomenally expansive discussion to be had here about the epistemology of "science" and its slow integration into the philosophical and academic processes of the western world over a course of hundreds and hundreds of years, but the point is, the journey starts out with completely disjointed categories like "Knowledge: Astronomy and Rhetoric" that are founded in aesthetics and class and lead to the people who study anatomy and the people who do actual surgeries being mutually exclusive sets of dudes. This is how you end up with Knowledge categories like "Local," which involves laws and inhabitants but not royalty or nobility, a "Religion" category that involves undead and gods but not the places that the afterlife actually happens, any kind of "Dungeoneering" category at all, and a "Nature" skill that gives you of weather and forests but not what kind of weather happens in a forest or where to find one plus insight into the habits of Giants and Monstrous Humanoids who seriously have their own actual civilizations and languages and poo poo. It's a mess and 100% predicated on your education being as a result of a childhood spent worrying about what kind of thing might come out of the woods and murder you or which of your friends was probably going to end up starting a war of genocide against your grandmother's side of the family when he grew up, not as a result of actually going to a school that was worth a good goddamn. Anyway. If you already recognize that asking your player to just use a prefab knowledge skill and justifying it is a kludge, then you must see why the process of just doing the same exact thing ahead of time is approximately 0% less kludgy. Just make the categories how you want them. It's either worth doing right or not really doing at all, and it takes like five minutes for your players to reassign skill ranks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
Eikre posted:way too much sir, this is just a burger king drive-thru Yawgmoth posted:I'm looking to add an extra shelf to the Arcana (and Nature, and Planes, etc) bookcases. it's a fine line to walk. if you pack too much utility into any one skill, it kind of becomes a skill tax to have the skill or else play at a disadvantage. at the same time, if you fragment every academic kind of knowledge into an individual skill, it makes picking any specific one kind of risky because there's a good chance you might not ever have an opportunity to apply it. why not just house-rule up some education feats that players can take (or you can give out as GM fiat if you don't want to tax them) that represent their scholastic knowledge? something like: Basic Education - Treat this like a bard's random bardic knowledge but regarding academic principles (the pythagorus theorem, basic elements & their uses, common linguistic structures in their native tongue, etc.) and the player rolls d20+character level+2. Crib the knowledge skill DCs to determine how hard it is to remember & apply something. Advanced Education (pre req: Basic Education OR Int 13+) - Same as above, but the player rolls d20+character level+4 and they treat any roll less than 8 as an 8 on the check. Master Education (pre req: Advaced Education OR Int 15+) - Same as above, but the player rolls d20+character level+6 and they treat any roll less than 10 as a 10 on the check. I know feat bloat is bleh, but I feel like it's preferable to adding even more granularity to the skill list. you could even add these to the bonus feats that wizards get or allow rogues to take them as their rogue level bonuses or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
Okay I don't even care whether you listen to my other assertion or not, but whatever you do, do not make a player pay a loving feat to tell you the Pythagorean theorem. Do not listen to the guy who is saying, "Oh, hmm, it's pretty tough trying to make sure a skill isn't too powerful or weak (in a system where the bottom of the range is "Knowledge: Artistocracy and Literally Nothing Else" and the top end is "Knowledge: Pretty Much Anything Magical Lol") and then unironically writes rules that works exactly like a maxed out skill except with a bizarre take-10 clause and a completely bullshit incentive for moving up its three-feat chain.
Eikre fucked around with this message at 22:37 on Dec 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
Knowledge talk is why I kinda like nWoD's skill system, where most of the skills apply to both practical and intellectual uses. Firearms includes maintenance of guns, Politics is about both knowing history and being able to manipulate the working of city hall, etc. Even Academics as a catch all "book smart" skill includes the practical stuff that comes with higher education, like being able to tell real philosophy apart from weird cult stuff.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
Eikre posted:<word salad> Freaking Crumbum posted:it's a fine line to walk. if you pack too much utility into any one skill, it kind of becomes a skill tax to have the skill or else play at a disadvantage. at the same time, if you fragment every academic kind of knowledge into an individual skill, it makes picking any specific one kind of risky because there's a good chance you might not ever have an opportunity to apply it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
Yawgmoth posted:Okay so assuming I parsed your blather appropriately, you have a very specific idea of what everything should be and are really mad that I won't like and/or subscribe. Gotcha. i guess you could still house-rule something about knowledge skills, like every hero gets a number of free knowledge skills equal to 1 + Int modifier, and those free knowledge skills are always considered to be at the skill cap. that keeps the pain of skill bloat minimal because they're not having to pick between something else they'd rather use and a knowledge skill.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 02:07
|
|
|
Alright kinda embarrassed to ask this but I really need somebody to break this down into the simplest way possible. Basically I'm having a lot of trouble understanding how to apply certain attack dc's. I plan on using vargouille's and I can't figure out the DC stuff for the shriek attack. "Instead of biting, a vargouille can open its distended mouth and let out a terrible shriek. Those within 60 feet (except other vargouilles) who hear the shriek and can clearly see the creature must succeed on a DC 12 Fortitude save or be paralyzed with fear for 2d4 rounds or until the monster attacks them, goes out of range, or leaves their sight. A paralyzed creature is susceptible to the vargouille's kiss. A creature that successfully saves cannot be affected again by the same vargouille's shriek for 24 hours. The shriek is a mind-affecting fear effect. The save DC is constitution-based and includes a +1 racial bonus." More or less I understand everything about the ability except why there are two DC saves, why one is fortitude and the other constitution, how they interact with each other, and what exactly is the second DC check against. Basically just break down that whole thing for me please. I'm dumb and it confuses the poo poo out of me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 05:12
|
|
|
A Vargoiulle has a Constitution of 12, which means its Constitution modifier is a +1 The base DC of any check is 10. Add +1 from the Vargouille's Constitution modifier and you get 11. Add another +1 from the stated racial bonus, and you get 12. So the DC, or target number, to resist the Vargouille's shriek is a 12. If the Vargouille uses this, anyone within 60 feet of the Vargouille, and can see it, and can hear it, needs to make a Fortitude save. A Fortitude save is normally a d20 roll, plus your base Fortitude bonus, plus your Constitution modifier. If the Fortitude save is equal to or higher than the DC of 12, then the target suffers no ill effects, and is immune to Shriek coming from the exact same Vargouille, for 24 hours. If the Fortitude save is lower than the DC of 12, then the target is Paralyzed for 2d4 rounds. This is the page detailing what Paralyze does: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#paralyzed The Shriek is mentioned as being a "mind-affecting fear effect". If you have any bonuses or abilities that apply to "mind-affecting" effects, or "fear" effects, then they apply against the Shriek. Fpr example, Bless gives you a +1 bonus on saving throws against fear effects, so that would apply here. Finally, that paragraph just makes mention that the Vargouille's Kiss ability needs the target to be Paralyzed first, so you're supposed to use Shriek first to create Paralyzed targets, and then use Vargouille's Kiss on anyone that does become paralyzed, although the Vargouille could use its Kiss against a target that's otherwise Paralyzed by some other means.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 05:30
|
|
|
There's not two saves, it's just telling you that they added in an arbitrary bonus to the monster's save DC and what ability score they chose when writing the power. Usually as I recall, the formula is DC = 10 + 1/2 monster's hit dice + an ability modifier. The exact ability is whatever the designer wanted it to be and can loosely justify, so usually Constitution for things that are generating physical force from the monster's body, like firebreath or screaming or whatever. Unless it's a spell, in which case it's 10 + spell level + an ability modifier, and it will generally be Cha. I think also effects with the first formula occur, but then the effect is as the spell.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 11:57
|
|
|
Bumper Stickup posted:Basically just break down that whole thing for me please. I'm dumb and it confuses the poo poo out of me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 14:46
|
|
|
Okay so that last bit of "x is y based +1" is just the designer telling you how the dc save was calculated. Everything makes way more sense to me now. Thanks everyone!
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 16:05
|
|
|
Besides the Black Cult of Ahm (Fiendish Codex 1) and the Paragnostic Assembly (Complete Divine) are there any organizations with knowledge seeking and/or demon fighting flavor?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
yikes Yawgmoth posted:
anyways, I'd say leave it up to a player to argue how a skill applies to a physical science. Nature, Survival, Arcana, Engineering, Planes, and Geography could all be maybe be used for earth science stuff depending on where you are and what's happening. Backstory and character personality have to play into it too, and it's more engaging and fun, for me anyways, to have to come up with how a particular skill applies to a given situation. Trying to cheese skill rolls owns and should be encouraged always imo
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 21:39
|
|
|
That would be my suggestion too but he thinks that's too much of a kludge, so instead he wants us to do the exact same thing except up-front, because then it's not a kludge, and since writing nine bulletpoints of skill-list addendum would be too much effort he would like a dozen of us to hash it out and come to a quorum on five bullet points of skill-list addendum instead.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 00:44
|
|
|
Eikre posted:That would be my suggestion too but he thinks that's too much of a kludge, so instead he wants us to do the exact same thing except up-front, because then it's not a kludge, and since writing nine bulletpoints of skill-list addendum would be too much effort he would like a dozen of us to hash it out and come to a quorum on five bullet points of skill-list addendum instead.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
Hey another question: is there someplace I can view the various monster manual pdf's that isn't scribd?
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
Bumper Stickup posted:Hey another question: is there someplace I can view the various monster manual pdf's that isn't scribd? 
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
That's what I figured but still thought I'd ask. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
Bumper Stickup posted:Hey another question: is there someplace I can view the various monster manual pdf's that isn't scribd? http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/29509/Monster-Compendium-Monsters-of-Faern-3e http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/1751/Fiend-Folio-3e http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/23424/Monster-Manual-II-3e http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/148765/Monster-Manual-35 http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/25927/Monster-Manual-III-35 http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/51646/Monster-Manual-IV-35 http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/54391/Monster-Manual-V-35 http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/28615/d20-Menace-Manual-d20M MM5 is the best one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2016 22:19
|
|
|
MM4&5 are both so full of really oddball creative stuff, to the point where I tend to look through them more than any of the others when I need an idea.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2016 22:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 05:47 |
|
|
I'm still a bit miffed that WOTC won't ever re-release the original 3.0 MM1. EDIT: Unrelated question: is there a standing rule for how much Natural Armor a monster gains? Is that in any way tied to its hit dice? gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 03:38 on Dec 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 01:19
|
|