The Great and Powerful Zorchev's page

LazarX wrote:

lemeres wrote:

I like The Daily Bestiary's examination of the lich while comparing it to worms that walk- lichdom is for those that barely made it to level 11...and then realize 'darn, I'm 70 years old, and I am never going to get to level 20 before I die. I need to look for another way to be eternal'.

Keep in mind that Wizard discoveries are player decisions, not character ones. You don't graduate from Wizard school with the knowledge that all you have to do to live forever is to make it to 20th level, which is something that practically no wizard will ever do.

Still, while the actual idea of levels are rather vague, specific spells are a more concrete thing that can generally gage magical ability.

The idea "I need to throw around full on wishes before I can get immortal by my own hand" is not too unreasonable.

And yes, very few make it to 20th level. That is why liches have a seductive allure. It is the low hanging fruit....filled with worms.

Wait, where exactly does it say that a wizard can become immortal @ 20th level?

It's Charisma. ^^

But wouldn't that then mean that people got more attractive as they got older, as age bonuses to charisma and penalties to constitution started to take place, which is contrary to common sense? And if we look at the true science of beauty it's all about physical symmetry, the signs of genetic fertility, and health. Therefore shouldn't someone's "Physical" Appearance be links to a "Physical" stat, regardless of how resourceful or pleasant they are?

So I know it's nowhere to be found in the official rulebook, but determining a character's 'natural' beauty at creation has been plaguing my thoughts recently. In my games we often role a 'hotness score' for characters (1d6+Cha) so we can easily move on from conversations of who's cuter and determine starting attitude, however I'm starting to wonder if looks would actually be based off of this stat as most people think. The crit deck says things like "ugly wound" dealing CHA damage, but it's also a mental stat. Thoughts? Should how pretty a character is be based off of charisma at all? Or should it be in the realm of constitution?

Thank you for your time.

I understand that One point of damage doesn't seem like that big of a deal, however I wanted to ask because in a solo campaign or once you get to higher levels with stat tomes and +6 strength belts that extra damage can mean life or death.

So with the new rules for barbarian stating they just receive a straight up +2 to attack and damage rolls, I have some new questions within these parameters
A) does that count on bows now, even though it never did before?
B) does that mean that a typical barbarian-with-a-greatsword now receives less of a bonus on damage than the original version of the class, even though that's what the class was focused on originally?

An example of B:

Pre-rage:
Str: 18
Bab: +4
Attack bonus: +8
Damage bonus: +6

In rage:
Str: 22
Bab: +4
Attack bonus: +10
Damage bonus: +9

Unchained In-rage:
Str: 18
Bab: +4
Attack bonus: +10
Damage bonus: +8

Is there a special rule to compensate for this or is it just the trade off for the new class?

Thank you for your input.

As a loyal player I buy and love pretty much everything published by your company, however as soon as one of your most convenient products ( and a staple of my gameplay ) has been decommissioned. I've owned the critical hit and fumble decks on my iPhone for about a year now, and I've loved every minute of using them, however I recently switched to the iPhone 6s and it appears of the apps are no longer available. Is this an issue specific to my phone or have you discontinued the product on Apple devices? And if this is a glitch is there any time frame in which I can expect the app to be available? Thank you for your time.

The exact text on paladins and using their spells is as follows:

"A paladin must spend 1 hour each day in quiet prayer and meditation to regain her daily allotment of spells. A paladin may prepare and cast any spell on the paladin spell list, provided that she can cast spells of that level, but she must choose which spells to prepare during her daily meditation."

However, another GM and I are currently discussing the meaning of this and the implication on sleep. The full text specifically never mentions needing any sleep to regain spells, no 8 hours incremental, no 4 hours consecutive, no interrupted/uninterrupted rest of any kind. To the best of my knowledge this is the end of the discussion on the matter, but he thinks it's far too OP to be intended that way. Have we missed something, or are paladins allowed to just meditate for an hour and regain all their spells with no sleep/rest required?

Furthermore, the text lists nothing on rest for Lay on hands/smite evil/etc. do they need rest to be regained as well or do they just recharge over time?

Thank you for the help.

-A confused GM

To clarify a few things:

First off, my apologies for any misleadings in the original text, and any flame wars invoked therein.

1. Of course the NPCs would also live my these rules, I simply said pcs to imply my focus on their experience.

2. The players would know about this beforehand, and if it ever got to the point where it was becoming unbearable it would be scaled back.

3. This would not be involved with any premise campaigns or worlds, these rules are ones I am developing for a world more along the lines of survival campaigns than the legends of old, and would be available to anyone who wished to use them.

4. The group I play with loves to be put up against problems like this, and they're all very good players who want more of a challenge and intrigue than "you hit" "you deal damage" etc. Our campaigns focus on role playing and longer time in between encounters than most, and when encounters do happen there is often a feeling of risk involved where the PCs discuss the need to fight vs. the wounds incurred. So two weeks to heal a sprained wrist isn't that much of an issue, it just gives a deterrent to players NOT to charge the dire mammoth without planning. Rather than kill them off when they make a mistake I would like to have a warning shot I can use against them. And wizards would be at a risk as well, I'm not sure how much but that's what I came here to discuss.

5. I come from a group where these rules would be kind compared to our last gm. He loved to beat down the players and used a system he developed called 'slow healing' in which you heal at a rate of 1hp/day, 2 with full rest and 3 with a trained healer. I don't want to do that, I just want to bring some interest to the battles.

6. This does have basis in the rules, specifically the critical hit and fumble decks. They list injuries like 'punctured lung' 'fractured rib' and 'pierced kidney' without explaining how long it takes for them to heal, and while that's fine when an enemy gets hit and dies three rounds later when PC gets hit by one of those crits we have to figure out what happens. There's even one which says the target loses a hand, most of the time though I offer a way out like a save or the use of high magic to remove/reduce the healing rate.

Again, my apologies for any confusion, this is supposed to be a fun conversation for campaigns involving a darker look at the world, as in game of thrones, not lord of the rings.

Also, how much cold damage can be taken before someone gets frostbite? How much fire damage before 3rd degree burns?

So typically by level 10, an up-and-front fighter will have taken thousands of points of damage, been critically hit over a hundred times, been knocked unconscious to often to remember, and always been just fine and dandy the next day. His hp goes back up, no broken bones, no concussion, in fact if she got magically healed then she won't even have a sore back in the morning according to the rules.

Does anyone have a standard they go by for inflicting specific, long term injuries on the players like broken bones or hitting a vital organ? Maybe whenever they go unconscious or lose more than 20% of full health in a single hit? (minmum 20?)
Should I allow a fort save?
How long should it take to heal, magically and non-magically?
Any advice would be amazing as I go for realism in this new campaign.

So the lich: an awesome display of the ultimate price for knowledge, the scourge of nations, being with the franchise from pretty much the beginning you'd think that we'd have a better idea of what exactly happens when a lich is created, but most of the text I can find on the matter doesn't go much farther than "unspeakable evils required". I'd like to start an open discussion on several matters involving the specifics of the lich to figure out what might happen in the new campaign I'm developing.

1. First of all, where would the knowledge on Phylacteries be found? I assume it's forbidden, but does that mean that each lich stumbles upon the idea for themselves and invents the whole process, or does it come from ancient books/communion with devils?

2. What kind of 'unspeakable horrors' go into creating a phylactery? Murder is an obvious option, but that seems too 'run of the mill' to count as unspeakable, any suggestions on what specific kinds of material components might be required, like destroying the souls of others in the creation process? I'm looking at a character possibly becoming a lich to research the cure for a horrible disease, fighting for the greater good. How horrible would the crimes have to be to turn someone away from this option?

3. What kind of spells should be required for the process of phylactery creation? Could you create one through alchemy?

4. What process might one go through to transfer their soul to a phylactery? How as a GM would I describe that experience?

5. After creation of and transfer to a phylactery, what happens to the body and how quickly? Most official liches are described as already decayed skeletons, but they are assumed to have been undead for hundreds if not thousands of years. How quickly does the body of a lich start to decay? Are there any preventative measures (such as gentle repose/restore corpse) which could delay or even counter this decaying process for months or years? I'm looking at a leader of a small isolated town who just recently (last five years) became a lich, how long could she theoretically keep this up before becoming noticeably, well, dead, or at least unwell?

6. When a phylactery is destroyed, does the lich instantly die? It seems like it would be a Dorian Grey situation unless the body was well kept, but could they potentially return from lichdom if the phylactery is destroyed?

7. Is it possible to transfer someone else's life force into a phylactery you created, thus potentially creating a "good" lich? Furthermore can liches repent and become good again after their creation? I'm looking at a character possibly becoming a lich to research the cure for a horrible disease, so basically serving the greater good, could they atone for the things discussed in question 2?

I know most of the time the book says it's "up to GM discretion", but I'd love to hear from multiple GMs and actually get down some parameters on the oft avoided subject. Feel free to respond to any or all of the topics as you please, and thanks for the help.

The absolute best (and by best, I mean infuriating to everyone else) version is where you combine leadership with the 3.5 feat 'ambitious leader' which allows you two extra cohorts only 1 level lower than you. You may also take this feat multiple times. It's guaranteed to break your game in 3.5 seconds flat!

Level 7: You control 1 cohort.
Level 9: You control 3 cohorts, who each control a cohort.
Level 11: Your Legion now consists of 75 cohorts or cohorts of cohorts.
Level 13: Your Nation now consists of over 2,000 cohorts alone.

I haven't done the math for followers yet.

I've taken on a position where I have to teach new players on a weekly basis, and while I'm getting pretty good at quickly explaining the basics I'd love to make it more intriguing - starting with the opening of explaining what stats do. If you can think up any better options, I'll tip my hat in your general direction, but here's mine.

You are traveling in the forest and come across a vast chasm, blocking your path:

The 18 STR character climbs down the cliff and back up the other side.
The 18 DEX character leaps across the gorge effortlessly.
The 18 CON character does a controlled fall to the bottom of the gorge - because they can take the hit.
The 18 INT character starts building a glider out of bark and a ladder out of vines to help the 18 CON character back to the top of the cliff.
The 18 WIS character takes the bridge...
Aaand the 18 CHA character convinces everyone that she found the bridge.

Full disclosure, this actually happened. Happy hunting.

So I'm somewhat confused about the limits to which these spells can affect the environment, all of these spells say that a will save is allowed when a person "comes into contact" with the illusion, and many of them provide resistance to touch, and some like permanent image provide temperature, sound, even taste. I understand that this is mostly said to bolster the illusion, but this becomes a problem within my campaigns.

Specifically, a few characters who use this constantly to bypass obstacles or enemies. Major examples of how this is being used are:

A) A Lion (or other nasty beast) is charging the party in a dungeon, the illusionist casts a wall of stone filling up the corridor in between the party and the lion. The lion fails its will save and believes the wall is there, does it therefore crash into the wall because the spell provides a touch component, does it have to make a strength check, or does it charge through anyway?

B) To cross a chasm, the illusionist casts Major or Tangible Image - which provides a touch component - to create a bridge. These spells list a "touch/pressure" component to the illusion, so similar to last time, could the pcs technically walk across this bridge if they 'fail' their will save and believe in the illusion?

C) In a combat, the Sorcerer casts an illusionary wall of fire, however this spell lists a temperature component to the illusion and gives no restriction to the amount of heat or cold, would anyone actually take fire/temperature damage passing through if they failed their will save?

D) Casting a silent image of a very bright light in front of a vampire's eyes, would this blind the vampire if it failed its will save and function as daylight or not?

I understand I can just tell the pcs that it doesn't work, but my players are very nitpicky and like to call me out when I do something that isn't in the rulebook, even if its in the best interests of the game, and especially if I'm telling them they can or cannot do something. So unless I want to spend an hour arguing, or have people going home hating me because I pulled the GM card, I would love to get some outside opinions on what limitations there are to the temperature, pressure, sound, and barrier components of these spells, and how these higher level (and in some cases actually simple) physics hacks work in respect to the fact that these are illusions, but basically hold up to reality under most simple tests.

..Thoughts?

p.s. thank you for your time, it is much appreciated.