|
4 months ago ::
Jan 25, 2013 - 12:36PM
#21
|
Date Joined:
May 12, 2009
|
Hit Dice Hit creatures requiring
4+1 or more +1 weapon
6+2 or more +2 weapon
8+3 or more +3 weapon
10+4 or more +4 weapon
So... is there any reason why a level 11 fighter should still be screwed when a golem shows up?
Yes, the reason is because the DMG entry for Hit Dice vs Immunity says:
''This Hit Dice equivalent only apply to monsters. Player characters and NPC cannot benefit from this.''
Yan
Montréal, Canada
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 25, 2013 - 6:04PM
#22
|
|
|
Powerful Wizard trying to defeat a powerful beast using their abilities alone? Totally fine!
Powerful Fighter trying to defeat a powerful beast using their abilities alone? Don't be stupid, he needs some glowy trinket to even THINK of harming it!
Magic items should be special, unique, powerful, and memorable. They should not be some required upgrade every character needs to advance. And they should NOT be the only thing allowing a character to actually do his job.
Three options here:
1) If Fighters need a magic item to harm super-special powerful monsters, so should a Wizard.
2) If a powerful Wizard can overcome resistances/immunities with their power alone, a powerful Fighter should be able to too. Remember guys, a high level Fighter isn't just some shlub swinging a sword. He's a hero, a legend.
3) Find a better way to represent how powerful those monsters are. A better, less stupid way than just saying "Even the most powerful warrior on the entire planet can't touch me because his weapon doesn't have enough fairy sparkles!"
EVERY DAY IS HORRIBLE POST DAY ON THE D&D FORUMS.
Everything makes me ANGRY (ESPECIALLY you, reader)
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 25, 2013 - 6:14PM
#23
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2008
|
Powerful Wizard trying to defeat a powerful beast using their abilities alone? Totally fine!
Powerful Fighter trying to defeat a powerful beast using their abilities alone? Don't be stupid, he needs some glowy trinket to even THINK of harming it!
Magic items should be special, unique, powerful, and memorable. They should not be some required upgrade every character needs to advance. And they should NOT be the only thing allowing a character to actually do his job.
Three options here:
1) If Fighters need a magic item to harm super-special powerful monsters, so should a Wizard.
2) If a powerful Wizard can overcome resistances/immunities with their power alone, a powerful Fighter should be able to too. Remember guys, a high level Fighter isn't just some shlub swinging a sword. He's a hero, a legend.
3) Find a better way to represent how powerful those monsters are. A better, less stupid way than just saying "Even the most powerful warrior on the entire planet can't touch me because his weapon doesn't have enough fairy sparkles!"
Mearls seems enchanted with some of the AD&D legacy rules, but he takes them out of context. That same monster that might need a +1 sword to hit might be only affected by a few spells and/or have magic resistance on top of that. Plus, there were real costs to the magic user for the powerful magic. In the context of the time it wasn't a bad rule.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 25, 2013 - 8:08PM
#24
|
|
|
I don't see the point of such immunities, unless there's a very strong specific flavor reason for a creature to be immune to mundane weaponry. "It's a powerful guy!" is not a reason. Either the martial character has the weapon to bypass the immunity in which case the immunity is doing nothing whatsoever to contribute to the challenge of the fight, or he doesn't have it and the monster is mostly impervious to him. If fighters are expected to have such a weapon, then what's the point of even having the property? It hardly seems worth it for "immune to random wizard backup crossbow potshots" to be something that's we're dropping on monsters with any degree of regularity.
Dwarves invented beer so they could toast to their axes. Dwarves invented axes to kill people and take their beer.
"Feel free to claim I said anything you like. How's someone going to call you out on it? Are they going to be all like, 'I know all of the things that Gary said, and that's not one of them?'"
- Gary Gygax
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 26, 2013 - 2:59AM
#25
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2006
|
My suggestion is most of special monster attacks should have got a XP value because DM wish replace them for a weaker or more powerful version, or the adventures is withing a dead magic zone.
I mean monster powers (and special ammunition) should be modular, optional.
"Say me what you're showing off for, and I'll say you what you lack!" (Spanish saying)
Book 13 Anaclet 23
Confucius said: "The Superior Man is in harmony but does not follow the crowd. The inferior man follows the crowd, but is not in harmony"
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 26, 2013 - 8:27AM
#26
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2008
|
I don't see the point of such immunities, unless there's a very strong specific flavor reason for a creature to be immune to mundane weaponry. "It's a powerful guy!" is not a reason. Either the martial character has the weapon to bypass the immunity in which case the immunity is doing nothing whatsoever to contribute to the challenge of the fight, or he doesn't have it and the monster is mostly impervious to him. If fighters are expected to have such a weapon, then what's the point of even having the property? It hardly seems worth it for "immune to random wizard backup crossbow potshots" to be something that's we're dropping on monsters with any degree of regularity.
This monster property existed in a time when D&D wasn't strictly a party of 4-6 going into a cave to rob a monster. PCs were expected to have a multitude of henchmen and hirelings that worked with them or for them. High level PCs may also have over a 100 followers in a stronghold. It was not expected each and every one of them was decked out in magic items. It's a bit of a legacy rule.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 27, 2013 - 7:23AM
#27
|
Date Joined:
May 27, 2012
|
PCs were expected to have a multitude of henchmen and hirelings that worked with them or for them. High level PCs may also have over a 100 followers in a stronghold.
Good point. I had entirely failed to consider this, since followers were always the first rule we'd nix (waay too much bookkeeping), but we can't take our own house-rules into account when evaluating the game for internal consistency.
The metagame is not the game.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 27, 2013 - 7:44AM
#28
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2006
|
Now I have a doubt.:
Let´s imagine a DM wish change some monster powers, for example he thinks the uncorporeal undead should have got psionic powers, because wraiths, ghosts, spectres... are "psiquis".
Or somebody wishs create a homebreed template (a classic half-XXX).
How could changing monster powers be possible without breaking balance of power?
My suggestion is special monster attacks are added like optional templates, and like this they could be easily replaced or changed.
For example:
Banshee: 500 PXs reward. (Standard, withouth the classic power death scream).
Banshee with death scream: 500 +250 PXs
Banshee with death scream(lesser) 500 + 125 PXs
Banshee with death scream(higher) 500 + 375 PXs
Banshee with psionic cry. 500 + 300 PXs.
"Say me what you're showing off for, and I'll say you what you lack!" (Spanish saying)
Book 13 Anaclet 23
Confucius said: "The Superior Man is in harmony but does not follow the crowd. The inferior man follows the crowd, but is not in harmony"
|
|
|
