Results 11 to 20 of 49
Thread: [BIRTHRIGHT] Magic Reform
-
06-10-2003, 06:09 PM #11
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Location
- California, near LA. (Mo
- Posts
- 143
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
> > I see no reason to cap total class level at 20, especially for the many
> > ancient and powerful creatures hanging around Cerilia. For example, given
> > that I think I probably do want the Magian and Llaeddra (but very possibly
> > no one else ever, including PCs) casting 9th level spells, I have no
> > problem at all giving each of them at least 34 total class levels. Among
> > other things, I think the Gorgon should get his full 25 levels of Fighter,
> > with no need to introduce "epic" classes, as the right way to extend the
> > table progression (especially for that class) is completely obvious.
> > Ryan Caveney
>
> But the way the Epic rules are written all progression beyond 20th level is handled using epic progression. This character level, not individual class levels. A multi-classed character can be an epic character but not be epic in any one class. Part of the progression is a change in progression of BAB, saving throws, etc. It is important to "follow" those rules since they are inmportant for blanacing out of the system. Now, if using a "home-brewed" system like you do then this doesn`t apply, although it will mean handling everything accordingly (monsters, NPCs, CRs, etc.). Using Epic progressin also allows for the acquisition of "epic" feats which are substantially more powerful than the "ordinary" ones.
Put the book down, Ird. Step outside the box for a sec. It`ll only be a
minute. Forget about quoting rules, and try your best to see Ryan`s comment
here. If you don`t agree with it and like the Epic rules better, that`s
fine. Say that. But he doesn`t need you to quote rules to him that he
already said he`d be in favor of disregarding. Simply extend the tables to
logical progressions and *never make the character an epic level character*.
In fact, never open the Epic Handbook. (Actually there is some cools stuff
in that book that`s not really epic, but that`s another post...) According
to Ryan, and I`m not sure I agree with this, but just so we`re all in the
same page, the Gorgon should be a 25th level fighter but not be Epic. It`s
just like having a 20th level character, but with 3 more fighter bonus
feats, 2 more standard feats, 5d10 hit dice, 10 more skill points (phoo!),
+2 Fort, +2 Refl, +2 Will, and an additional +1 to any ability score.
Ignore the "epic feats" and keep in mind that the gorgon`s not really going
to be fighting other "epic creatures" so CRs not such an issue.
-Lord Rahvin
************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message."Chance favors the prepared mind."
--Sir Isaac Newton
-
06-10-2003, 06:09 PM #12
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Location
- California, near LA. (Mo
- Posts
- 143
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
> That would mean anything over a 5th level spell is not available for casting. A 6th level spell needs a 11th level caster. If you make it mandatory to dual class, that means they need to be 21st or 22nd level. Add a scion template to increase the ECL and it gets even worse.
They don`t need to be 21st level or whatever. As it is, I think 20th level
characters have absurd power, and so too do spellcasters capable of casting
5th level spells. 5th level is plenty high for most single spell casters,
and beyond that we get effects that are better off left in the discipline of
realm magic. At 5th level, you already have spells that can completely
dominate someone`s free will, clouds that kill everyone inside, render a
creature completely helpless, can send massive damage through a cone of
cold, create massively powerful illusions, move things with your mind,
teleport, animate the dead, unleash violent storms, summon walls of fire,
raise the dead back to life, smite foes with holy power, leave powerful
curses to control actions, summon elementals, or instantly slay a living
creature. Beyond that, even characters in most fantasy novels don`t weild
that kind of power and when they do they are either prevented from using it
for some reason, or else its something more closely tied to the idea of BR
realm magic.
-Lord Rahvin
************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message."Chance favors the prepared mind."
--Sir Isaac Newton
-
06-10-2003, 06:28 PM #13
- Join Date
- Dec 2002
- Location
- Malden, MA
- Posts
- 761
- Downloads
- 2
- Uploads
- 0
On Tue, 10 Jun 2003, Lord Rahvin wrote:
> In fact, never open the Epic Handbook. (Actually there is some cools
> stuff in that book that`s not really epic, but that`s another post...)
And I even said I like *some* of the stuff in it, just not as a whole. =)
> According to Ryan, and I`m not sure I agree with this, but just so
> we`re all in the same page, the Gorgon should be a 25th level fighter
> but not be Epic. It`s just like having a 20th level character, but
> with 3 more fighter bonus feats, 2 more standard feats, 5d10 hit dice,
> 10 more skill points (phoo!), +2 Fort, +2 Refl, +2 Will, and an
> additional +1 to any ability score.
Yes, that`s exactly what I meant. Some of the numbers look a bit off --
e.g., I think that should be 2 fighter bonus feats (from 22nd and 24th
levels), not 3 -- but the idea is right. Gorgy has a decent Int, though,
so his skill points will go up a bit more than an "average" Ftr 25.
Ryan Caveney
************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.
-
06-10-2003, 06:28 PM #14
- Join Date
- Feb 2003
- Posts
- 388
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
On Tue, 10 Jun 2003, Lord Rahvin wrote:
> Put the book down, Ird. Step outside the box for a sec. It`ll only be a
> minute.
Why should anyone listen to you when you open up with this comment? You
obviously consider him to be beneath you, so why bother posting? Do you
just want to instruct us? Thank you, my lord, for speaking to us from on
high.
--
Daniel McSorley
************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.
-
06-10-2003, 06:38 PM #15
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Originally posted by Lord Rahvin
> > I see no reason to cap total class level at 20, especially for the many
> > ancient and powerful creatures hanging around Cerilia. For example, given
> > that I think I probably do want the Magian and Llaeddra (but very possibly
> > no one else ever, including PCs) casting 9th level spells, I have no
> > problem at all giving each of them at least 34 total class levels. Among
> > other things, I think the Gorgon should get his full 25 levels of Fighter,
> > with no need to introduce "epic" classes, as the right way to extend the
> > table progression (especially for that class) is completely obvious.
> > Ryan Caveney
>
> But the way the Epic rules are written all progression beyond 20th level is handled using epic progression. This character level, not individual class levels. A multi-classed character can be an epic character but not be epic in any one class. Part of the progression is a change in progression of BAB, saving throws, etc. It is important to "follow" those rules since they are inmportant for blanacing out of the system. Now, if using a "home-brewed" system like you do then this doesn`t apply, although it will mean handling everything accordingly (monsters, NPCs, CRs, etc.). Using Epic progressin also allows for the acquisition of "epic" feats which are substantially more powerful than the "ordinary" ones.
Put the book down, Ird. Step outside the box for a sec. It`ll only be a
minute. Forget about quoting rules, and try your best to see Ryan`s comment
here. If you don`t agree with it and like the Epic rules better, that`s
fine. Say that. But he doesn`t need you to quote rules to him that he
already said he`d be in favor of disregarding. Simply extend the tables to
logical progressions and *never make the character an epic level character*.
In fact, never open the Epic Handbook. (Actually there is some cools stuff
in that book that`s not really epic, but that`s another post...) According
to Ryan, and I`m not sure I agree with this, but just so we`re all in the
same page, the Gorgon should be a 25th level fighter but not be Epic. It`s
just like having a 20th level character, but with 3 more fighter bonus
feats, 2 more standard feats, 5d10 hit dice, 10 more skill points (phoo!),
+2 Fort, +2 Refl, +2 Will, and an additional +1 to any ability score.
Ignore the "epic feats" and keep in mind that the gorgon`s not really going
to be fighting other "epic creatures" so CRs not such an issue.
-Lord Rahvin
I also recognized that there was a house rules issue here and pointed out that in my reply. But it becomes difficult to have a discussion when people are coming at the point from their own "highly developed" sets of house rules. We are not all on quite the same page when discussing things since not everyone (OK almost no one) has the same adaptations and things that one person considers understood aren't even know by another person since they hadn't seen the full set of house rules being used as a reference.
IMO, I'd rather use as much from the core materials as possible and only "tweak" things to fit vice re-write everything to suit my personal vision. This is only an opinion and everyone is more than entitled to make their own campaign any way they wish too.Duane Eggert
-
06-10-2003, 06:52 PM #16
- Join Date
- Feb 2003
- Posts
- 388
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
On Tue, 10 Jun 2003, Ryan B. Caveney wrote:
> Yes, that`s exactly what I meant. Some of the numbers look a bit off --
> e.g., I think that should be 2 fighter bonus feats (from 22nd and 24th
> levels), not 3 -- but the idea is right. Gorgy has a decent Int, though,
> so his skill points will go up a bit more than an "average" Ftr 25.
Ignoring the ELH is fine at "low" epic levels like this. The problems the
book was designed to solve arise at higher levels, maybe 60 or so. By
that point, your good save will be around +36, your bad ones at +18 (plus
ability modifiers). That`s an 18 point spread in your saves, and it
basically means that for something to challenge one set of characters
(say, an epic poison with a fortitude save, versus fighters), it will be
completely unsaveable for those without that good save. Similarly for
melee- if BAB progression continues normally, then either the fighter will
hit with every attack, and the rest might hit part of the time, or the
fighter will hit part of the time, and no-one without a 1/1 BAB
progression will be able to hit at all.
Thus, the epic rules, which boil down to: at odd levels, get a +1 epic
attack bonus (same as BAB, but doesn`t count for iterative attacks). At
even levels, get a +1 to all your saves. This keeps the spread down.
Spell progressions and bonus feats and abilities change a little, but not
a lot.
So a fighter will never have more than a 10 point spread in BAB over a
wizard of equivalent level. Party saves shouldn`t spread more than 6-10
points base, not accounting for ability modifiers. This enables DMs of
high level characters to have encounters which involve everyone, and not
just the one character that can do something.
At the level we`re talking about, say 25th level for the gorgon, 21st or
so for the Magian, it doesn`t really matter, particularly since these
aren`t part of an adventuring party which has to be DM`ed. Though that
might be an interesting game... The Gorgon, the Magian, and the Serpent
get tossed through an interdimensional portal and have to build trust and
find their way home... nah.
--
Daniel McSorley
************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.
-
06-10-2003, 08:27 PM #17
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Gothenburg, Sweden
- Posts
- 949
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
I think part of the problem that the Epic Level Handbook tends to create is that it distorts the way people look at levels. A 17th level wizard in core D&D is bloody powerful - and he's supposed to be - yet once you introduce the epic level rules, he suddenly looks like some kind of wimp.
If you look at what PCs of any level can actually do, it's pretty epic, even below "epic" levels. Any fighter of above 10th level can reasonably expect to be able to fight an army on his own - an army of about 200 1st-level warriors is about EL 15 (though, realistically, much lower) - if you just take the theory at face value, a single 15th-level fighter has a 50/50 chance of taking down an army of 200 men on his own. I'd say that's pretty "epic." That's a basic fighter with a sword. A wizard, with his weapons of mass destruction, can achieve the same effect much earlier and with a greater degree of reliability.
Now, the reason for the epic rules being as they are is simply what Dan said - the rules are based around a d20. In most cases, when characters have high class-based modifiers, they also generally gain high ability-based modifiers (fighters have high strength, rogues high dexterity, and so on), widening the gap further. If the gap gets too wide (as it would inevitably do, given an infinite extension), then some saves become impossible to make for a fighter, while the wizard succeeds automatically - or vice versa. Makes for extremely bad play, especially given the prevalence of save or die effects. I'd imagine it'd do something like making characters die in shifts - "ok, this combat, the wizards get to shine, while the fighters die and await resurrection afterwards." Simply extending the normal rules for a few levels work ok for PCs, and for NPCs, it doesn't matter that much anyway (actually, it does - it'd produce NPCs with extreme achilles heels to some effects and immunities to others, but there are plenty of those anyway).
Finally, I'm not necessarily sold on the idea of requiring spellcasters to multiclass every other level or whatever - of course, if it works for you, more power to you. There's a few systematic implications beyond the immediately obvious that needs to be applied, though. Spells should probably add +2 DC per spell level instead, as a minimal form of compensation - for instance, the base DC for a 5th-level spell should be 10 + 10 (5x2) + at least 2 (for a 15 Int). Otherwise, pretty much everyone will make their saves, and wizards will be useless. I do think that the "real" issue here, though, is perhaps the view of the leveling issue that I mentioned earlier - if 20th level doesn't seem like so much, then 9th level spells may seem commonplace. Given the levels that are in the Birthright products, though, I think I can recall about 3-4 NPCs capable of casting 9th-level spells, given 3e rules. Not really a whole lot.
Of course, I also think that calling Birthright a "low magic" setting is entirely wrong. On the contrary, the entire setting strikes me as much more "magical" than the Forgotten Realms, for instance - or, rather, Birthright *has* magic - FR just has another science. I think, with the bloodlines, mebhaighl, the Shadow World, the presence of fey and elves and awnsheghlien, the entire setting is filled with magic - it's just that the trappings of it are substantially less common than in other settings. "Rare, but powerful magic" would perhaps seem a better way to describe the setting, given how it is described in the books. Wizards are powerful and mysterious, magic items are rare, but not necessarily weak (just look at the equipment of the premier NPCs).
If you want to change the core assumptions of the setting, by making it low or high magic, or introducing monks or psionics, that's okay by me. I do think that a better way of modeling Birthright as described in the 2e materials, though, would be to introduce a flat XP penalty on creating magic items (to make it less viable to churn out +1 swords, but not really penalize more powerful items too much) and somehow reward wizards for working in subtle or mysterious ways instead of blasting away at stuff, possibly by moving damaging spells up one or two spell levels.Jan E. Juvstad.
-
06-11-2003, 12:44 PM #18
- Join Date
- Dec 2002
- Posts
- 94
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
I think my biggest objjection to the mandatory split is the already low number of high level mages.
I think HMA is listed as 16th. That is not even using 9th lvl spells.
The Sword Mage, one of the feared mages is only 10th. That is only 5th level spells. The mandatory split will lower that to Fireball class.
But one suggestion that I think will make the mandatory split better would be free domain spells at each of the mandatory levels.
A mage get 2 normal spells when leveling, and when leveling in the "domain mage" class gets 1 domain spell. That will give them an ability similar to higher level spells.
A second suggestion would be a bonus to battle magic. Give them the feat Battle Magic free at first level, make Warcraft a class skill, and give a small periodic bonus to the roll. That would make their battle magic harder to resist, but not affect their casting in dungeon settings.
-
06-13-2003, 08:40 AM #19
Wouldn't it be far simple to reduce the spell progression of the various classes instead of requiring players to pick levels in another class?
If the wizard got new spells at levels 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, 22, 25 that should cap out most PC casters at about 5-6th level spells. Other spellcasting classes need to be reworked too of course.
Give the wizard something in return for the lost spells (skill points, hd, BAB, saves, feats, or whatever). Giving him greater number of low-level spells at high level might also be a good idea as it inceases his staying power, without giving him access to the most powerful magics.
Add a short banned spell list, and there is actually not very much work on this version.
-
06-13-2003, 09:23 AM #20
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Originally posted by Green Knight
Wouldn't it be far simple to reduce the spell progression of the various classes instead of requiring players to pick levels in another class?
If the wizard got new spells at levels 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, 22, 25 that should cap out most PC casters at about 5-6th level spells. Other spellcasting classes need to be reworked too of course.
Give the wizard something in return for the lost spells (skill points, hd, BAB, saves, feats, or whatever). Giving him greater number of low-level spells at high level might also be a good idea as it inceases his staying power, without giving him access to the most powerful magics.
Add a short banned spell list, and there is actually not very much work on this version.Duane Eggert
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks