PDA

View Full Version : Awnshegh Build



irdeggman
06-24-2004, 12:12 PM
Here is a proposal for building awnshegh. It is what fiftyone used to build The Spider that he posted on the general discussion boards. Basically it uses the Unearthed Arcana Bloodline model. Instead of having 'empty' classes to account for the LA buildup of the progression these are the points where the 'physical transformations' occur and the character gains an additional LA because of it.

See download in later post. This one was an earlier version that was 'mising' some things.

Osprey
06-24-2004, 01:36 PM
Although it was a bit thick to break down and figure out, I generally like this approach a lot, mainly because it allows normal character level progression while gaining awnshegh traits. This seems much less "hoggish" than awnshegh monster levels, which force most awnshegh to be epic if they are to be competent character classes as well. I also like that the LA for awnshegh still stack with total character levels for purposes of caster levels, class abilities, and determining overall number of feats and ability score increases. I do think, however, that that section could use some re-writing to clarify and simplify exactly what is or is not affected by the awnshegh LA's. Meaning, make two columns; Column A = stats that stack with the awnshegh levels, and Column B = things that are NOT affected by the awnshegh levels. This would be immensely helpful to new readers I think.

Osprey

irdeggman
06-25-2004, 04:01 PM
oops posted the 'wrong' version of this try this one instead.

See later downloads for more 'recent' versions

tcharazazel
06-25-2004, 06:37 PM
I think that it looks good.

With regard to the alignment to evil as part of the first level of the class: What about the SeaDrake? He didn't turn evil. So, is this automatic? or is there some kind of will save, or does the character's alignment just shift 1 step towards evil then, ie from good to neutral?

irdeggman
06-25-2004, 07:04 PM
Originally posted by tcharazazel@Jun 25 2004, 01:37 PM
I think that it looks good.

With regard to the alignment to evil as part of the first level of the class: What about the SeaDrake? He didn't turn evil. So, is this automatic? or is there some kind of will save, or does the character's alignment just shift 1 step towards evil then, ie from good to neutral?
The alignment shift is automatic with no save. The character can always choose to not take the awnshegh level (and take the 20% exp penalty) and not gain the physical transformations associated with the awnshegh level.

The Book of Regency (pgs 24+) makes it fairly clear that the road to becoming an awnshegh is evil (and chaotic).

I wouldn't rely too heavily on all of the things in 2nd ed. 3.5 forces certain changes, one of them is utilizing a "logical" systematic method for building monsters. 2nd ed had no such thing and thus monsters (including awnshegh) had no pattern for their development. They just were. This type of reasoning has no place in 3.5.

Also, as Gary has pointed out the 2nd ed rules didn't require bloodform to become an awnshegh. This system does, and so will the BRCS. This has to do with the insertion of logic building or formula usage when building monsters, etc. in 3.5. Hence the insertion of the requirement of having the bloodform blood ability for the transformation.

Bottom line is does the system capture the feel and theme of BR andnot necessarily every exact attribute and detail of 2nd ed.?

tcharazazel
06-25-2004, 09:13 PM
it does, its why i like it :) Just wanted to check that one difference from 2e is all.

geeman
06-25-2004, 11:50 PM
At 08:37 PM 6/25/2004 +0200, tcharazazel wrote:



>I think that it looks good.With regard to the alignment to evil as part of

>the first level of the class: What about the SeaDrake?



In BE the awnsheghlien who aren`t evil are mostly the ones based

(apparently) upon animals.



The Boar - Neutral

The Wolf - Neutral

The Hydra - Chaotic Neutral

The Leviathan - Neutral (evil)



But three others start out life as animals and are not evil:



Maalvar the Minotaur - Chaotic Neutral

Seadrake - Neutral

Siren - Neutral



The Banshegh is, of course, her own little weirdness being both (or

alternately) chaotic good and chaotic evil.



As a generality, however, seven of the twenty-five major awnshegh in that

text are not evil, so if one wanted to keep some sort of parity with that

then a system of portraying awnshegh should not require that they become evil.



It should probably also be noted that lots of awnsheghlien are not

chaotic. I think of Azrai as being a chaotic evil god, and there is text

to support that, but it doesn`t necessarily mean that awnsheghlien are both

chaotic and evil by definition.



Gary

irdeggman
07-01-2004, 09:10 PM
All right here is the latest version of the awnshegh build. Pretty much only Gary has voiced any negative comments on this process. I'm going to give it once last round of comments and then put it up for a sanctioning vote. This will then be added to Chap 9, when revised and the bloodform blood ability in Chap 2 will be revies to recognize this progression.


pdf version:

See later version

irdeggman
07-01-2004, 09:10 PM
Here is the word version:

See later version

geeman
07-02-2004, 12:20 AM
How about putting the awnshegh character class into a document along with

the UA Bloodline-Awnshegh method and let people vote on which option they`d

prefer?



Gary

tcharazazel
07-02-2004, 12:50 AM
aye, that sounds like a fair idea :)

irdeggman
07-02-2004, 01:32 AM
Originally posted by geeman@Jul 1 2004, 07:20 PM
How about putting the awnshegh character class into a document along with

the UA Bloodline-Awnshegh method and let people vote on which option they`d

prefer?



Gary
OK Gary e-mail it to me.

But remember to divorce it from your BP system.

irdeggman@cox.net

Beruin
07-02-2004, 12:40 PM
I applaud the efforts of trying to develop a consistent rule to create awnsheghlien. Gary`s awnsheghlien class is definitely useful, as is irdeggmans UA based transformation. I guess I will use both as a source of inspiration. But, frankly, I do not really care for a consistent ruling in this regard. In 2E the creation of awnsheghlien seemed to be random and chaotic. Some transformations occurred suddenly and drastic (the Seadrake, the Vampire), others build up more slowly. To me, this reflects the chaotic nature of Azrai`s blood and in the end it boils down to the whim of the DM. This is perhaps rather un-3.5-editionish of me, but I would really like to see an optional rule somewhat like this: "The process of becoming an awnshegh is unpredictable and cannot be fully defined by the rules. The DM is encouraged to develop his own way of dealing with the transformation as he sees fit, using the following guideline: Evil acts further and speed up the transformation, while good acts can slow or stall this process."



Magian wrote:

>>How is it that the Sphinx is further changed than Rhoubhe?<<



(okay, different thread, I know). The Manslayer is a difficult case. He hates humans with a passion and gives in to his hatred, furthering the transformation, but he still is an elf and other elves still seem to see him as one of their own. Perhaps his elven outlook and quasi-immortality slow down his transformation. In addition he is still compassionate and sometimes even performs acts of mercy (cf. the Tuornen sourcebook or the entry for Nesirie in the Book of Priestcraft). So he still fights the corrupting influence of Azrai and perhaps could even be redeemed (This really would be an epic adventure). This shows that Azrai`s blood is not all-powerful, it can be fought and perhaps even the transformation to awnsheghlien status can be reversed, however difficult or near impossible that may be.



This, however, is a role playing issue and I really doubt that it could be addressed in a rule.

geeman
07-02-2004, 04:00 PM
At 03:32 AM 7/2/2004 +0200, you wrote:



> OK Gary e-mail it to me.But remember to divorce it from your BP

> system.irdeggman@cox.net



Not being very familiar with the message boards, I don`t know if I can

simply put them up in a post. If you don`t mind, I`d prefer to format the

.doc and create the .PDF files myself, but if not I`ll send them along to you.



Gary

irdeggman
07-02-2004, 04:07 PM
Originally posted by geeman@Jul 2 2004, 11:00 AM
At 03:32 AM 7/2/2004 +0200, you wrote:



> OK Gary e-mail it to me.But remember to divorce it from your BP

> system.irdeggman@cox.net



Not being very familiar with the message boards, I don`t know if I can

simply put them up in a post. If you don`t mind, I`d prefer to format the

.doc and create the .PDF files myself, but if not I`ll send them along to you.



Gary













Message boards?

I&#39;d rather put the two together and set them up for a poll myself, so if once you finish just e-mail it to me and it should work out.

geeman
07-02-2004, 05:30 PM
At 06:07 PM 7/2/2004 +0200, irdeggman wrote:



>Message boards?



I mean posting directly to the birthright.net message boards, as opposed to

sending a post to the birthright-l email list. I don`t know if one can

just attach files or whatever to such a post since I`m only vaguely

familiar with the interface.



>I`d rather put the two together and set them up for a poll myself, so if

>once you finish just e-mail it to me and it should work out.



OK, will do. I`ve been fiddling around with some PDF formatting stuff, and

I`d like to see how well that`s worked out since I`m putting together a

text with all the character descriptions for the awnsheghlien and

ersheghlien that I`ve posted in the past, along with some other BR specific

monsters.



BTW, if anyone knows any good software to create PDF`s that is free or

reasonably priced please let me know. I`ve been using CutePDF Writer which

is very easy to use, but doesn`t seem to embed truetype fonts--despite the

FAQ that says it does--so the Bebris font doesn`t show up in the PDF, which

is a cryin` shame.



Gary

irdeggman
07-02-2004, 07:36 PM
Scansoft has a couple.

They have a pdf writer for around &#036;50 and a pdf converter pro for around &#036;100. US. The converter also included the converter for pdfs into word.

The UA bloodline pdf I did was using the converter pro (includes the pdf writer) and seems to work pretty well so far.

Raesene Andu
07-02-2004, 10:03 PM
I use Jaws Pdf creator at work, as it keeps any links or bookmarks you setup in a document. It is around US&#036;70-80 I believe. It sets itself up as a printer and to convert a document you just print to the pdf creator. Comes in very handy at work, but we use it every day to save and file incoming faxes so they are easy to find later.

Don E
07-08-2004, 05:16 AM
In the UA bloodline version I think it might be better to get rid of the Awnshegh levels, and instead give EL adjustment at set levels. There is already not much difference between as simple EL and the &#39;empty&#39; awnsh level, and it adds yet another concept into the game. The bonus/penalty to intimidate/diplomacy could also just be written into the physical changes.

My greatest argument against this anwshegh build is that it limits highly altered awnsheghs to the very high levels. If one want to introduce a highly morphed NPC into a relatively low level campaign, the rules does not &#39;allow&#39; for it.

irdeggman
07-08-2004, 01:22 PM
In the UA bloodline version I think it might be better to get rid of the Awnshegh levels, and instead give EL adjustment at set levels. There is already not much difference between as simple EL and the &#39;empty&#39; awnsh level, and it adds yet another concept into the game. The bonus/penalty to intimidate/diplomacy could also just be written into the physical changes.

The awnshegh class levels was based on how the UA bloodlines accounted for the inherent LA of the granted abilities preceeding that level. I added in the physical changes at those levels, which seemed to be a logical insertion of the times they would occur that gave a &#39;logical&#39; progression to the transformation process. The &#39;empty&#39; class levels accounted for the preceeding LA that had been accrued, the additional LA added accounts for the extra LA coming from the changes due to the physical transformation.


My greatest argument against this anwshegh build is that it limits highly altered awnsheghs to the very high levels. If one want to introduce a highly morphed NPC into a relatively low level campaign, the rules does not &#39;allow&#39; for it.

This was a logical vice totally random and DM&#39;s whim assignment. It does seem to parallel some (but not all) of the BR awnshegh transformations. Those with bloodform (great) have greater physical transformations than those with bloodform (major) {compare the &#39;big three&#39;, the Spider, Manslayer and Gorgon}.

The amount of great physical transformation is supposed to be (and was in the 2nd ed BR awnsheghlien) comparable to the amount of phycial power imbued. That is the more power the awnshegh gains the more more dramatic is the physical transformation and hence the reverse is also true. The greater the transformation the more power is imbued because of it. This equating of transformation and power would eliminate the ability to have a highly changed awnshegh in a low level character (and it should).

Ksaturn
07-09-2004, 02:43 PM
I don&#39;t see why you should Have to take a penalty on bluff... correct me if i&#39;m wrong but i remember hearing somewhere "Azrai the deciever". Why couldn&#39;t an awnshighlian be as subtle as the shadow himself?

irdeggman
07-09-2004, 03:21 PM
Originally posted by Ksaturn@Jul 9 2004, 09:43 AM
I don&#39;t see why you should Have to take a penalty on bluff... correct me if i&#39;m wrong but i remember hearing somewhere "Azrai the deciever". Why couldn&#39;t an awnshighlian be as subtle as the shadow himself?
This was based on the character trait Abrasive from Uneartherd Arcana, pg 87 (you gain +1 to Intimidate but -1 to Diplomacy and Bluff checks).

They are considered inherently balanced by doing it that way.

It is blatently difficult for a creature that has undergone physical changes to be as successful at bluffing as was Azrai, who was a god after all - they get that plus thing to Charisma because of being a deity, etc.

tcharazazel
07-09-2004, 04:50 PM
However, scions of Azrai can also get a bonus to their Cha from the minor blood power. This does reflect that scions of Azrai have the potential to become better "decievers" like Azrai...

One other point:
So a dragon would have a more difficult time bluffing a human than another human? While an extreme example it does have a simple point. Trying to understand the subleties of other cultures/societies languages and their behavior patterns would only increase with the more differneces there are from the culture of the character who is trying to sense the motive of that creature.

In other words, it would be more difficult for a human to try an understand a reptilian humanoid as reptiles generally dont use facial expresions when comunicating which humans use to help determine if the person is telling the truth. An even more extreme example woudl be some of those funky looking outsiders, heheh, they should definately have a bonus for humans to try and sense their motives. Of course if the human is imtimately familiar with their cultures, in which case it would make sense there would be no penalty to interperate their actions. A more real life example is how different cultures and between humans can be difficult for people to understand each other and acurately determine if they are bluffing or not.

What this comes down to is that the more inhuman a Awnshegh becomes the more difficult it would likely be to understand and accurately interperate its actions in order to sense its motive. Now of course they were human once, at least most were, and not raised in the society of the monster type they have become, however, take the Seadrake for example, a giant sea serpent, so you are telling me it will be easier to understand and sense the motive of a giant sea serpant, who has lost all of his physical human aspects? Hell no, that just doesnt make sense. And don&#39;t forget as he was once human, about 500 years ago, any of his human physical behaviors are pretty much gone by now, because of the change...


To be honest, its difficult to really give them a set penalty as each changes into different monsters (and some are more humanoid while others are not), however, I agree with the diplomacy being one. It maybe better to have the other be more open to the DM&#39;s discresion. For example, it would likely be more difficult for the Seadrake to gather information than for some human to check if he is bluffing, so for him having it be -1 Diplomacy and -1 Gather Info (instead of bluff) would be appropriate.

tcharazazel
07-09-2004, 05:00 PM
One thing to clarify:

The other skill getting penalized should be Cha based to keep the balance then as they all are social skills.

geeman
07-09-2004, 05:50 PM
At 05:22 PM 7/9/2004 +0200, irdeggman wrote:



> QUOTE (Ksaturn @ Jul 9 2004, 09:43 AM) I don`t see why you should Have

> to take a penalty on bluff... correct me if i`m wrong but i remember

> hearing somewhere "Azrai the deciever". Why couldn`t an awnshighlian be

> as subtle as the shadow himself?

>-----------------------------

>

>This was based on the character trait Abrasive from Uneartherd Arcana, pg

>87 (you gain +1 to Intimidate but -1 to Diplomacy and Bluff checks).They

>are considered inherently balanced by doing it that way.It is blatently

>difficult for a creature that has undergone physical changes to be as

>successful at bluffing as was Azrai, who was a god after all - they get

>that plus thing to Charisma because of being a deity, etc.



I wonder if they should have either penalty. Awnsheghlien don`t appear to

be particularly disadvantaged when it comes to either deceiving (bluff) or

dealing (diplomacy) in that some of them have the same trade, diplomatic,

etc. relationships with nearby realms as any other regent. In fact, in

certain cases they would appear to be more advantaged in either regard than

normal regents....



As silly as this might sound at first... what about a penalty to disguise

checks rather than bluff/diplomacy?



Gary

irdeggman
07-09-2004, 07:45 PM
The point of the bluff/diplomacy penalty was to reflect the penalty for a creature (remember they are now becoming creatures, i.e., monsters, and not just another humanoid) is to reflect the problem that a &#39;creature&#39; having an inherently &#39;evil&#39; aura and starting to take on physical changes (these penalties also don&#39;t start to happen until the physical changes start to take place). Putting these two things together it becomes necessary for the awnshegh to rely on means other than normal interaction (i.e., the skill checks) to get these things accomplished. Magic works real good, so does blood abilities.

Bottom line is that most humanoids won&#39;t trust a creature that is starting to look alien hence the penalties to the interaction checks while the plusses to intimidate (they do strike fear into those around them). It is poosible for a DM to use a combination of skills to reflect a certain interaction - like a successful intimidate check couldd be used to augment a diplomacy or bluff check. It is all in the situation, sometimes intimidate is the more appropriate skill to use, sometimes diplomacy.

This system was designed to account for the &#39;norm&#39; as much as the case is and not the extremes or to cover all situations. Again, it is based on an existing mechanic so it wasn&#39;t totally made up.

geeman
07-09-2004, 09:30 PM
At 09:45 PM 7/9/2004 +0200, irdeggman wrote:



>The point of the bluff/diplomacy penalty was to reflect the penalty for a

>creature (remember they are now becoming creatures, i.e., monsters, and

>not just another humanoid) is to reflect the problem that a `creature`

>having an inherently `evil` aura and starting to take on physical changes

>(these penalties also don`t start to happen until the physical changes

>start to take place).



Sure, but I think the assumption that a "creature" or "monster" is

inherently less able to bluff or perform diplomacy is somewhat

questionable. That`s especially the case in BR since the awnsheghlien

transformation, though evil and degenerate, isn`t necessarily something

that interferes with the character`s general capacity to perform things

like interaction skills. Disguise, on the other hand... that seems like

something that transformation would definitely effect.



Gary

geeman
07-09-2004, 10:10 PM
OK, I`ve got a version of the awnshegh/ershegh character class written up

that is purged of BP (nasssty, nassssty BP, they burnzz usss.)



Irdeggman: Birthright.net doesn`t seem to want to give up an email address

for you. (I got an error message when trying to look at your

profile.) Where shall I send it?



Gary

irdeggman
07-10-2004, 10:29 AM
The same e-mail that I have constantly been putting out in the posts (the same one you had sent the BP bloodline stuff to before).

irdeggman@cox.net

irdeggman
07-10-2004, 10:45 AM
Originally posted by geeman@Jul 9 2004, 04:30 PM
At 09:45 PM 7/9/2004 +0200, irdeggman wrote:



>The point of the bluff/diplomacy penalty was to reflect the penalty for a

>creature (remember they are now becoming creatures, i.e., monsters, and

>not just another humanoid) is to reflect the problem that a `creature`

>having an inherently `evil` aura and starting to take on physical changes

>(these penalties also don`t start to happen until the physical changes

>start to take place).



Sure, but I think the assumption that a "creature" or "monster" is

inherently less able to bluff or perform diplomacy is somewhat

questionable. That`s especially the case in BR since the awnsheghlien

transformation, though evil and degenerate, isn`t necessarily something

that interferes with the character`s general capacity to perform things

like interaction skills. Disguise, on the other hand... that seems like

something that transformation would definitely effect.



Gary

Alright let&#39;s go with this assumption then.

Should they get a bonus to intimidate?

Seems very appropriate (and fits with the general prsentation of awnshegh in the 2nd ed BR products). How does this get balanced mechanically?

I gave the equivalent from UA that handles bonuses to intimidate - I haven&#39;t seen an equivalent proposal yet. A penalty to disguise does not off set a bonus to intimidate. The standard is 2 penalties for a single bonus, unless a character takes a feat which is the balance for 2 bonuses.

And I absolutely disagree with the fact that awnshegh have a harder time performing diplomacy (the skill not the domain action, 2 separate things we are taking about here). People fear them and don&#39;t trust them, both are portrayed in the 2nd ed material. Those who do diplomacy with awnshegh do so out of fear not trust. Hence bonus to intimidate and penalty to diplomacy.

When using the diplomacy domain action the awnshegh can put in RP to influence the success, and would if it was really necessary.

We have to be careful when comparing 2nd ed to 3.5 on things like diplomacy. The mechanics are different in 3.5 then they were in 2nd ed, so just because it isn&#39;t highlighted in 2nd ed can generally be associated with a difference in game mechanics. Plus I don&#39;t think there was a diplomacy NW proficiency in non-BR settings was there? And the one in BR was specifically tied to the domain action with no other benefits at all and was limited to a priest NW proficiency at that. NW proficiencies in 2nd ed also didn&#39;t have ranks that could be improved readily, instead a character had to purchase the NW proficiency again and that improved his chance of success by 1. A penalty to a diplomacy check in 2nd had was much harsher than one in 3.5.

tcharazazel
07-10-2004, 11:50 AM
I gave the equivalent from UA that handles bonuses to intimidate - I haven&#39;t seen an equivalent proposal yet.

Heh, didn&#39;t you read my post?

I put in a proposal to include the -1 Diplomacy (and I agree that Awnshegh should have a more dificult time dealing with those humans they once dealt with) and the other -1 should go towards a different social skill at the DM&#39;s discresion thus showing the variability of the transformations. However, after reading what greg said I believe this 2nd penalty should probably go to any other skill.

Thus we would get +1 to intimidate, -1 Diplomacy and -1 to one other skill that the DM chooses reflecting the particular awnshegh transforation. For many this 2nd one will likele be a -1 penalty to disguise and we could even put this one in as a common one, though I still beleive it is better to leave it a little open for change as every awnshegh changes differently.


One final point that we should really make clear. All these bonus/penalties to their skills only apply when dealing with those who know their true appearance/nature. In other words, an Awnshegh who is always uses an alter self spell to maintain their original appearance would not have their skills changed, unless they remove the spell occasionally and someone sees their true form and later deals with them. Then even though they may change back to still look like a human, the person knows they are an awnshegh and thus those skill bonuses/penalties apply.

irdeggman
07-10-2004, 12:39 PM
Heh, didn&#39;t you read my post?

Yes I did but it didn&#39;t contain any specific proposal just a vague one. . . .


I put in a proposal to include the -1 Diplomacy (and I agree that Awnshegh should have a more dificult time dealing with those humans they once dealt with) and the other -1 should go towards a different social skill at the DM&#39;s discresion thus showing the variability of the transformations. However, after reading what greg said I believe this 2nd penalty should probably go to any other skill.

Thus we would get +1 to intimidate, -1 Diplomacy and -1 to one other skill that the DM chooses reflecting the particular awnshegh transforation. For many this 2nd one will likele be a -1 penalty to disguise and we could even put this one in as a common one, though I still beleive it is better to leave it a little open for change as every awnshegh changes differently.

This is far too broad to be a real mechanic. While Bluff might not be the best skill, it is the skill used for negotiations (not treaty level ones, but individual level ones - like haggling over prices and goods) and hence does fit.



One final point that we should really make clear. All these bonus/penalties to their skills only apply when dealing with those who know their true appearance/nature. In other words, an Awnshegh who is always uses an alter self spell to maintain their original appearance would not have their skills changed, unless they remove the spell occasionally and someone sees their true form and later deals with them. Then even though they may change back to still look like a human, the person knows they are an awnshegh and thus those skill bonuses/penalties apply.

I disagree with this one. While the penalties can be offset by other means, situational modifiers, spells, magic, blood abilities, etc., the penalties are because once the awnshegh starts to change others can &#39;sense&#39; it. This aura of evil and dread starts to permeate the awnshegh and affects those around him. Because this transformation is founded in the blood of Azrai it is greater than anything else that the character can do to overcome it. It is the spark of divine essense that is permeating the awnshegh that is the cause of these reactions - people start to fear the awnshegh and becasue of this fear they react poorly to diplomacy and bluffing.

tcharazazel
07-10-2004, 01:49 PM
This is far too broad to be a real mechanic. While Bluff might not be the best skill, it is the skill used for negotiations (not treaty level ones, but individual level ones - like haggling over prices and goods) and hence does fit.


Heheh, you finaly come up with a good reason, and it does make logical sense :)
Ok, then leaving the trio of negotiaion skills remain as such makes sense then, for balancing purposes. Though, I still disagree with the penalty to bluff especially as they have Azrai&#39;s blood and are forced to turn evil, heh, if they were Anduiras blood and forced to turn good, it would make more sense for them to be worse at lying. It just doesnt make thematic sense for the BR setting, and this is the place where balance is lacking.

To fix that we should forgo the typical balance of the negotiation skills in favor of the thematic BR setting balance, which is the purpose of all this anyway, refining a BR specific class. Thus, replacing the penalty to bluff with a penalty to disguise or gather info, would make more sense. I included gather info as it would be likely be more difficult for an awnshegh to deal with people to get the needed information.

However, what about gary&#39;s point? It does have merit, as it should be more difficult for awnshegh to disguise themselves, especially the more changed they become. Should that maybe included in the transformation of the character somehow? So the more changed a character is the more difficult it would be to disguise their transformation, like if they turn into a giant crab.



It is the spark of divine essense that is permeating the awnshegh that is the cause of these reactions - people start to fear the awnshegh and becasue of this fear they react poorly to diplomacy and bluffing.


Heheh, ok it would require more than an alter self spell then, it would require a disguise bloodline spell also and possibly a mind shielding ring to hide their alignment just to cover all bases... However, it could still be done then.

One point though, you state that the skills are all negotation skills. As negotation skills are influenced by cultural preconseptions/beliefs ect, and in general most BR cultures do not like or are fearful of things/people that are very different physically (thanks to the awnshegh in part) then the real cause for the awnshegh skill changes is based upon the pysical changes, and not the divine essense. True, it is the divine essense that changes the character, however, it is the resutling physical changes that cause the populace to be afraid of the character. Otherwise, all scions of Azrai would have those changes to their skills. People are also just as likely to be fearful of Ehrsheghlien, because of their physical changes, not because they are scions.

geeman
07-10-2004, 03:30 PM
At 12:45 PM 7/10/2004 +0200, irdeggman wrote:



> Alright let`s go with this assumption then.Should they get a bonus to

> intimidate?Seems very appropriate (and fits with the general prsentation

> of awnshegh in the 2nd ed BR products). How does this get balanced

> mechanically?



I agree that the bonus to intimidate fits the general presentation of

awnsheghlien. I suppose one could balance it with diplomacy and disguise

rather than diplomacy and bluff, since bluff seems to be the one that is

the source of contention here. Personally, I don`t think diplomacy is

quite right either, but I`m less concerned about it given the "benefits" of

intimidation in 3.5 (as you note later in the post.)



Disguise is one of those things that I think really needs to get addressed

in relation to awnsheghlien and ersheghlien, however, and something that

must get more difficult for the creatures in question as they progress in

their transformation. I bring this up because one of the things that has

been pointed out to me in relation to awnsheghlien and ersheghlien is that

many of their transformations (and the disadvantages they might get from

that transformation) can be countered in 3e by spells. Disguise is a

microcosm of that same effect. That is, a character shouldn`t be able to

easily hide his/er transformation since the obvious nature of the

transformation is one of the purposes of the process. In a broader sense,

there is an interaction between disguise and the magic system in that

certain spells give the character a bonus to a disguise attempt. As such

the ability to disguise (Alter Appearance, Change Self, Polymorph) an

awnsheghlien or ersheghlien should probably best be portrayed as a

progressive penalty; -2 per level in an awnsheghlien class, for instance,

or -1 per transformation and disadvantage applied to the character.



Point being, should the bonus to intimidate be similarly progressive? Is

the Gorgon`s intimidation the result of his ranks in the skill or the

product of his physical transformation. Both, probably, but is his

transformation more intimidating than that of an awnsheghlien who is less

transformed like, say, the Siren or the Wolf?



>And I absolutely disagree with the fact that awnshegh have a harder time

>performing diplomacy (the skill not the domain action, 2 separate things

>we are taking about here).



The convention that Mark Vandermeulan came up with many moons ago was to

capitalize the word when it was the domain level definition being used, as

in someone might be the Vassal to a Regent, meaning he has a Vassalage

arrangement with the prince in which RP and GB are transferred to him every

domain turn, while just about every soldiers in the prince`s army is his

vassal--meaning they have sworn a personal oath of loyalty to him. It

seems to work fairly well when using the domain level terms in contrast

with the same words in a non-domain level sense.



>I don`t think there was a diplomacy NW proficiency in non-BR settings was

>there?



I don`t know of any.



Gary

soudhadies
07-10-2004, 06:31 PM
Does a bonus need to be balanced at all if the awnshegh is giving up a character level to gain that bonus? I will admit that I don&#39;t have UA, nor do I truly intend to get it, so I have no real knowledge of it.

Also, if instead of tieing awnshegh progression to character level, why not tie it to character behaviour instead? After all, awnsheghlien who give themselves wholy to the "dark side" as it were, should gain the powers of their dark blood faster than those who resist it with every bone in their body. Even if the latter is of much higher level than the former.

One idea (which I&#39;m not going to go through the trouble of hammering out in detail before I&#39;m sure it won&#39;t be shot down out of hand) would be to have a sort of "dynamic template" for awnsheghlien. This would be sort of like a standard template, except that there would be a menu of potential powers and effects for the DM to choose from. The DM would then tabulate the total effect of the template, probably each power could have a point value of some sort, and look on a chart to see what the CR adjustment for the awnshegh would be, and presto awnshegh. Down the line if the awnshegh were to perform an act heinous enough in the DM&#39;s mind to further its progress, the DM would choose a new appropriate power to add, and recalculate the CR adjustment for the template.

I realize this idea doesn&#39;t really build on any D20 canon law, but it would in theory work as well for instant awnshegh as slow build awnshegh (as defined by the two paths to awnsheghlienism mentioned in the Book of Regency.

tcharazazel
07-11-2004, 12:08 AM
Honestly, i think its a good idea, however, like you said it will get shot down. So to make it a little more compliant, maybe instead of having it so free form, maybe taking it to the paths for the awnshegh class instead. There could be 3 paths: those that resist totally changes, those that partially resist the changes, and those who embrace the changes. Each would get progressively more benefits from the changes, and be able to change more, still within their bloodline potential (ie a major scion of Azrai will still not be able to change more than a Great scion of Azrai. However, they could look equivalant if the major scion embraces the changes while the great totally resists the changes.)

geeman
07-11-2004, 02:20 AM
At 08:31 PM 7/10/2004 +0200, Bearcat wrote:



>Does a bonus need to be balanced at all if the awnshegh is giving up a

>character level to gain that bonus?



In this case it`s just one of the things that the character is giving up

for he LA, though, so in combination with the other factors it should be

balanced against the benefits of a character level. In this case a +1 or

+2 to intimidate surely isn`t worth a character level, but I was thinking

it might be made a progressive bonus special ability somewhat like the

ranger benefits to certain skills or



>One idea (which I`m not going to go through the trouble of hammering out

>in detail before I`m sure it won`t be shot down out of hand) would be to

>have a sort of "dynamic template" for awnsheghlien. This would be sort of

>like a standard template, except that there would be a menu of potential

>powers and effects for the DM to choose from. The DM would then tabulate

>the total effect of the template, probably each power could have a point

>value of some sort, and look on a chart to see what the CR adjustment for

>the awnshegh would be, and presto awnshegh. Down the line if the awnshegh

>were to perform an act heinous enough in the DM`s mind to further its

>progress, the DM would choose a new appropriate power to add, and

>recalculate the CR adjustment for the template. I realize this idea

>doesn`t really build on any D20 canon law, but it would in theory work as

>well for instant awnshegh as slow build awnshegh (as defined by the two

>paths to awnsheghlienism mentioned in the Book of Regency.



I put decimal values into a system of bloodline balancing and it didn`t

seem to go over well. The idea above seems to be more easily digested, but

I should note that points seem to be only marginally better accepted than

decimals.... Essentially, of course, they are the same thing, and the

reality is that everything really can be broken down into a point value,

but nonetheless it doesn`t seem to be the vocabulary that people are

looking for.



Gary

soudhadies
07-11-2004, 03:10 AM
Originally posted by tcharazazel@Jul 10 2004, 09:08 PM
There could be 3 paths: those that resist totally changes, those that partially resist the changes, and those who embrace the changes. Each would get progressively more benefits from the changes, and be able to change more, still within their bloodline potential.
I&#39;m not sure I understand this, are you tying this to character level progression? The system I proposed was divorced from character level progression and was tied, through the use of the dynamic template idea, to behaviour and not experience like in monster classes, scion classes or template classes.

Actually, the new issue of Dragon, which contains some new template classes, carries a warning that template and monster classes can have effects that are unpredictable and unbalancing, so we might want to be careful about embracing them wholeheartedly in every aspect of the new Birthright Campaign.

irdeggman
07-11-2004, 01:43 PM
Does a bonus need to be balanced at all if the awnshegh is giving up a character level to gain that bonus? I will admit that I don&#39;t have UA, nor do I truly intend to get it, so I have no real knowledge of it.

Actually the bonus to intimidate (which in the UA bloodline based version is progresive Gary) was not part of the reasons that the character uses a level. It was inherently balanced so that it adds or subtracts nothing, the reason the character needs to take a level of awnshegh is to account for the benefits gained previously. It is part of the UA method - a progressive fractional LA as it were, that after a certain point adds up to a LA. The UA bloodline has no LA given in addition to the class, the class serves as the level LA. The reason the Awnshegh version has an additional LA is because those are the points that the physical transformations occur and these transformations grant bonuses that are equivalent to the LA (e.g.,extra physical attacks, etc.) You can look to Savage Species to see how close these &#39;extra&#39; benes stack up to the LA guidelines there (fairly close, but nothing is exact and always correct).


Also, if instead of tieing awnshegh progression to character level, why not tie it to character behaviour instead? After all, awnsheghlien who give themselves wholy to the "dark side" as it were, should gain the powers of their dark blood faster than those who resist it with every bone in their body. Even if the latter is of much higher level than the former.


What this also implies is that a character can be redeemed from the awnshegh path by commiting good acts and thus reverse the transformation, something that would probably make the whole issue much more cumbersome.

If you check out the WotC site and their Savage Progressions thread you can see that the &#39;new&#39; WotC standard is to not use LA but to use class levels instead. They have posted a class level version for every LA template in the MM and race in the DMG. This system allows for a character to get balanced with other characters instead of &#39;automatically&#39; becoming substantially more powerful than the other players&#39; characters but gaining a LA template. If I could come up with an "easy" way to account for the LA from the physical transformations I would, but it seemed overly cumbersome to do that instead of just throwing in the LA. It might not work real balanced and if someone ends up developing a better progression for it then all is better.


One idea (which I&#39;m not going to go through the trouble of hammering out in detail before I&#39;m sure it won&#39;t be shot down out of hand) would be to have a sort of "dynamic template" for awnsheghlien. This would be sort of like a standard template, except that there would be a menu of potential powers and effects for the DM to choose from. The DM would then tabulate the total effect of the template, probably each power could have a point value of some sort, and look on a chart to see what the CR adjustment for the awnshegh would be, and presto awnshegh. Down the line if the awnshegh were to perform an act heinous enough in the DM&#39;s mind to further its progress, the DM would choose a new appropriate power to add, and recalculate the CR adjustment for the template.

I realize this idea doesn&#39;t really build on any D20 canon law, but it would in theory work as well for instant awnshegh as slow build awnshegh (as defined by the two paths to awnsheghlienism mentioned in the Book of Regency.


--------------------

Bearcat
Soudhadies@ieg.com.br

Actually when we were putting together the BRCS-playtest we bounced around a system that was reminicient of the Star Wars Dark Side point system, but couldn&#39;t get it to work out mechanically.

Remember that when coming up with a system for creating an awnshegh that there will be some players whose characters will go down that path, so it is not solely for NPC. I don&#39;t necessarily agree with the concept of allowing players to play an awnshegh, but I do know that there will be some campaigns where the DM likes the idea and will use it. So we need to keep an overview of the possible uses of this system when developing it.

But if you really believe in your concept, then write it out. Post it and people will talk about it, just remember that most people are critics. That doesn&#39;t mean they don&#39;t like it or at least parts of it, they are only looking for holes and weaknesses in the implementation.

Only post it on the &#39;Royal Library&#39; now, since IMO we are beyond the "I have an idea" point in writing/revising the BRCS.

Don E
07-12-2004, 04:07 AM
Originally posted by irdeggman@Jul 8 2004, 02:22 PM
The awnshegh class levels was based on how the UA bloodlines accounted for the inherent LA of the granted abilities preceeding that level. I added in the physical changes at those levels, which seemed to be a logical insertion of the times they would occur that gave a &#39;logical&#39; progression to the transformation process. The &#39;empty&#39; class levels accounted for the preceeding LA that had been accrued, the additional LA added accounts for the extra LA coming from the changes due to the physical transformation.
I fail how to see why this warrants a new game mechanical concept. Instead one could simply say that the Awnshegh gains an additional EL adjustment when reaching the level in question.

irdeggman
07-14-2004, 01:24 AM
Here is the combined UA bloodline and Awnsheglien Class proposals.


Gary had a few things that he wanted to bring up for discussion on the Class proposal:

1) It has the sudden transformation occuring when bloodtheft is done on an awnshegh - should this be on any scion of Azrai instead?

2) The proposal doesn&#39;t address whether it should be harder to resist the change based on the scion&#39;s bloodline strength (score and level (minor/major/great/true). Should these be factors?

Gary fill in if I messed something up here or left a question off.


Here is the pdf version:

irdeggman
07-14-2004, 01:24 AM
Here is the Word version:

Don E
07-14-2004, 02:18 AM
Two quick comments to option 2:
- For DR of such a low magnitude, wouldn&#39;t it be more reasonable to allow it for the non-bypass type? E.g. 1/-, 2/-, etc. Otherwise I think the damage reduction should be increased slightly. A damage reduction 3/silver is hardly worth 3 transformation if compared powerwise to other, e.g. +6 natural armour.
- How many times per day can the Spell Like Abilities be used? Unlimited or something like 3 times per day?

geeman
07-16-2004, 06:20 AM
Sorry it`s taken me a few days to get back to you on this... been busy.



At 04:18 AM 7/14/2004 +0200, Don E wrote:



>Two quick comments to option 2:- For DR of such a low magnitude, wouldn`t

>it be more reasonable to allow it for the non-bypass type? E.g. 1/-, 2/-,

>etc. Otherwise I think the damage reduction should be increased slightly.

>A damage reduction 3/silver is hardly worth 3 transformation if compared

>powerwise to other, e.g. +6 natural armour.



Yeah, I think you`re right. Originally, it was 1/--, 2/--, etc. One of

the folks in my group pointed out that one could get a high DR much more

quickly than, say, the barbarian class provides that special ability, so I

"toned it down" to include a vulnerability. One could get transformations

a bit faster using that original (BP) system, so it`s probably a matter of

the power of the transformation getting smudged in the translation.



>How many times per day can the Spell Like Abilities be used? Unlimited or

>something like 3 times per day?



It should be limited to a particular number of times/day. How about if it

starts out at 1/day and can be improved to 3/day by a second transformation?



Must sleep....

Gary

irdeggman
07-20-2004, 09:52 AM
Any one else have any comments here? Surely people have an opinion on which method is the &#39;preferrred&#39; one. We need to narrow this down for fiftyone and his write ups for the d20 Atlas. If I don&#39;t see any comments soon, I&#39;ll jsut post it for a vote on which way to proceed and then we can narrow the details down accordingly - we just can&#39;t proceed in two directions at the same time on this issue.

RaspK_FOG
07-21-2004, 11:07 PM
Even though I generally do not like the way UA handles bloodlines, it seems to me that this is the cleanest method hereby presented.

the Falcon
07-22-2004, 10:17 AM
Comments on Option 1.


If the scion
has one such blood ability, shift the appropriate
column to the right by one. If the scion has more
than one, then shift it by two. The signature blood
abilities are: death touch, fear, invulnerability, major
regeneration, regeneration, touch of decay and wither
touch.Okay, I think that little piece of text is totally unclear; "shift the … column to the right"—what does it mean? I do understand what you mean by the example that follows, but the text above really doesn&#39;t make any sense to me.


If the scion doesn’t take awnshegh levels as a class
level before exceeding the character level indicated
on the table, he gains no further awnshegh traits and
must take a 20% penalty on all future XP gains.The beginning of that sentence seems a bit strangely phrased to me. How about this alternative:
"If the scion doesn&#39;t talk the indicated awnshegh level (instead of a class level) before exceeding ..."? Should you balk at using the word "indicated" more than once per sentence, I&#39;m sure you can think of something better. ^_^

I like the way you&#39;ve classified the physical changes into first, second and third order. That was really something that needed to be done to be able to provide any kind of structure to the transformation. Good job.


Attacks are on the order of a claw/claw
attack that does 1d6/1d6 damage or a ranged natural
attack, like spitting, that affects and individual for
1d6 or a group for 1d4 damage.Typo.


For example the Spider’s Animal Affinity
blood ability is normally applicable to serpents
(Azrai’s totem animal) but his physical
transformation had changed his totem animal to
spiders instead.You talk of the Spider as if he&#39;s history. I think it would sound better to say that "his physical transformation has changed his totem animal to spiders".


Third order changes: are even more pronounced.Typo.


The typical physical attack increases in dice size
from the second order change.I think the D&D convention is that the singular form of dice is die and not dice, which some people seem to prefer.

Who gets to choose which traits the awnshegh gains? The DM or the player?


Gaining a +1 to an ability score, the same
ability score may be increased more than
once with subsequent uses of this traitIf the player gets to choose, this is fine by my, but otherwise if the DM chooses, I think this should be a +2 bonus, in the spirit of 3rd edition.


Major: major traits are things on the order of:I thought the proper phrase was "in the order of"?? :huh:


A class-like ability normally available at up
to 5th level of the applicable class.Which class is that?? :blink:


Increasing the power of an existing blood
ability so that its effects are roughly 50%
moreDM&#39;s fiat, I suppose?


Gaining a template with all of its benefits
and restrictions, for example the Undead
template.The Undead template? Is that from the BRCS? Or is it from some WotC source book? I&#39;ve never heard of it.


The awnshegh may choose an appropriate
disadvantage, when picking up an awnsheghlien
level, in exchange for an equivalent level trait.So, he may choose, huh? Does that mean you don&#39;t have to choose one when you gain an awnshegh level? What is an "equivalent level trait", anyways?


Movement is
reduced by 10&#39;.The current D&D convention is to use ft. and not &#39; when indicating a distance in feet.


Ability score reduction. Some affliction reduces
an ability score by 2, except for Con.Typo, and only some afflictions reduce an ability score by 2? That&#39;s not very clear.


The awnshegh suffers from some
sort of mental issues, e.g., obsession, delusion,
bi-polar type of disorders.Make that "or bipolar disorder".


Effects vary based on
the type of illness and can be along the level of
acting last in the initiative order …Acting last in initiative order? I get a very 2nd edition feel from that. Not even zombies do that in v3.5.


The awnshegh is sensitive to
light and is considered dazzled when in daylight
conditions only suffering a -2 penalty instead of
the normal -1.Strange, counterintuitive use of the word "only" here. "Thank heavens he&#39;s not injured, but only dead." Get my drift? ^_^


Heightened mental illness. The awnshegh
suffers a more heightened type of mental illness.I don&#39;t know about you, but the word "heightened" has positive connotations with me. I would suggest using the word "severe" instead.


Acute mental illness.The word "acute" can also imply that it doesn&#39;t last that long or that it has a sudden onset, as opposed to chronic, especially in this context. I would try to avoid ambiguity here and opt for something else. Same goes of course for "acute susceptibility to material type", etc.

I&#39;ll comment on Option 2 later, since I haven&#39;t really had the time to read it yet.

the Falcon
07-22-2004, 10:24 AM
You know what? Option 2 is just, well, too much. Five pages of dense text as opposed to the just three pages of loose text of Option 1. It&#39;s too … bulky, I suppose. I must admit I haven&#39;t really read it all that well yet—I just glanced it over—but already it just seems unwieldy and way too detailed.

I love the creative use of quasi-celtic, though. "Unshegh"? Thumbs up for that. ^_^

Anyhoo, I don&#39;t feel that I would ever be able to use Option 2 in practice, simply because of its sheer volume.

Therefore, I vote for Option 1.

irdeggman
07-22-2004, 02:26 PM
Thanks for the concise and specfic comments Falcon.





QUOTE
If the scion
has one such blood ability, shift the appropriate
column to the right by one. If the scion has more
than one, then shift it by two. The signature blood
abilities are: death touch, fear, invulnerability, major
regeneration, regeneration, touch of decay and wither
touch.

Okay, I think that little piece of text is totally unclear; "shift the … column to the right"—what does it mean? I do understand what you mean by the example that follows, but the text above really doesn&#39;t make any sense to me.

That is why I added the example, I couldn&#39;t figure a ready way to word it concisely - hence the example. I like examples anyway, they usually (if done properly) show what is intended by the text.

If you can come up with better words for the text, I&#39;d appreciate it.



QUOTE
If the scion doesn’t take awnshegh levels as a class
level before exceeding the character level indicated
on the table, he gains no further awnshegh traits and
must take a 20% penalty on all future XP gains.

The beginning of that sentence seems a bit strangely phrased to me. How about this alternative:
"If the scion doesn&#39;t talk the indicated awnshegh level (instead of a class level) before exceeding ..."? Should you balk at using the word "indicated" more than once per sentence, I&#39;m sure you can think of something better.

I&#39;ll try to follow the UA wording closer, it is better. "If the scion does not take an awnshegh level before reaching the character level indicated on the table, . . . ."



Who gets to choose which traits the awnshegh gains? The DM or the player?


I need to insert some text about defining the changes and personality types. This process should be worked out between the player and DM. That is assuming a DM will allow a player to play an awnshegh. Again, it is up to the DM if he/she allows this - but the transformation process should be worked out between the two since the player is role-playing the character and that has a lot to do with the way the transformations occur.



QUOTE
Gaining a +1 to an ability score, the same
ability score may be increased more than
once with subsequent uses of this trait

If the player gets to choose, this is fine by my, but otherwise if the DM chooses, I think this should be a +2 bonus, in the spirit of 3rd edition.

A +2 happening as frequently as the minor traits occur adds up too quickly. The UA bloodline system grants ability increase in increments of +1 for this reason. A +2 increase is a sudden increase and by itself renders a +1 LA. Part of the logic of this transformation process is to make it gradual and to avoid as many sudden LA as possible.


{quote]QUOTE
Major: major traits are things on the order of:

I thought the proper phrase was "in the order of"?? [/quote]

On the order of sounds more appropriate than in the order of which indicates a sequence not a level of equivalency.



QUOTE
A class-like ability normally available at up
to 5th level of the applicable class.

Which class is that??

Any class. This is choosing a class ability that is gained, for example sneak attack (rogue) or DR (barbarian), etc. This is also intended to reflect the type of ability for example a rogue gets a sneak attack of +1d6 at 1st level, this increases to +2d6 at 3rd, 3d6 at 5th and4d6 at 7th and so on. Probably need to reword this for clarity though.



QUOTE
Increasing the power of an existing blood
ability so that its effects are roughly 50%
more

DM&#39;s fiat, I suppose?

See above, it needs to be worked out between the DM and player since this is a jointly built transformation.



QUOTE
Gaining a template with all of its benefits
and restrictions, for example the Undead
template.

The Undead template? Is that from the BRCS? Or is it from some WotC source book? I&#39;ve never heard of it.


Yikes. WotC changed undead from a template (3.0) to a type (3.5). I have to work on this one some.



QUOTE
The awnshegh may choose an appropriate
disadvantage, when picking up an awnsheghlien
level, in exchange for an equivalent level trait.

So, he may choose, huh? Does that mean you don&#39;t have to choose one when you gain an awnshegh level? What is an "equivalent level trait", anyways?[quote]

Yes the use of disadvantages is purely optional in this system. Not all of the listed awnsheghlien have disadvantages, while some have very strong ones. Equivalent level trait is just what it says. Disadvantages are minor/major/great and traits are minor/major/great.



[quote]QUOTE
Ability score reduction. Some affliction reduces
an ability score by 2, except for Con.

Typo, and only some afflictions reduce an ability score by 2? That&#39;s not very clear.

What typo? I don&#39;t understand. The point was to be open on the type of afflication that casues the ability score reduction (again part of the transformation process), it could be poor internal organ development, off sized limbs, etc.



QUOTE
Effects vary based on
the type of illness and can be along the level of
acting last in the initiative order …

Acting last in initiative order? I get a very 2nd edition feel from that. Not even zombies do that in v3.5.

Yeah I thought about that. UA lists a disadvantage with a -6 to initiative. That is probably the best example to use.



QUOTE
Heightened mental illness. The awnshegh
suffers a more heightened type of mental illness.

I don&#39;t know about you, but the word "heightened" has positive connotations with me. I would suggest using the word "severe" instead.


QUOTE
Acute mental illness.

The word "acute" can also imply that it doesn&#39;t last that long or that it has a sudden onset, as opposed to chronic, especially in this context. I would try to avoid ambiguity here and opt for something else. Same goes of course for "acute susceptibility to material type", etc.

Hmm how about severe and drastic (still not sure about that word though)?



Again thanks for ths specific comments. Comments are real useful when phrased that way as opposed to the "let&#39;s try something else" etc.

irdeggman
07-22-2004, 02:40 PM
I&#39;m closing this thread, for now at least. I&#39;d rather us focus on choosing which method to work on (see new poll).

Once that is decided then we&#39;ll get down to specifics.

geeman
07-22-2004, 05:40 PM
the Falcon writes:



> You know what? Option 2 is just, well, too much. Five pages of dense text as opposed to the just three pages of loose text of Option 1.



Yeah, you know, I knew that was going to be at issue at some point. For the

sake of a document probably half of those could be trimmed and the text on

creating new ones need only be included.



On the whole, however, I think there is a certain "six of one... half dozen"

issue in that I find the transformation aspect of Option 1 to be inadequate

and vague.



Gary