tirsdag den 31. juli 2012
The Three Scrolls
Magical Markings
fredag den 27. juli 2012
Buying potions
Buying potions is possible, at times. In big cities, common potions are available to buy. But since potions are fairly expensive, no one makes them up front. So while a big temple might have 1 or 2 of a common sort, anything more and you need to wait for the potions to be made from scratch. If you
are looking for a rare potion, you need to ask around and see if anyone has the formula. If you are
looking for a rare and illegal potion, you need to visit the shadier side of town and see if someone is willing to share. Prices of rare and illegal potions may be higher than the price listed.
As dark elves, things a bit different. You may normally purchase common potions, as they are
available with your house. If you want anything other than common potions, your house may not have it, and getting it outside of the house means making a really good contact at another House or heading down to Scumtown, and try your luck there.
Common potions that are always available in a big city
Name Price Time
Animal Control 400 gp 4 days
Climbing 400 gp 5 days
Healing 400 gp 2 days
Sweet Water 500 gp 2 days
Water Breathing 500 gp 4 days
Fire resistance 500 gp 3 days
Flying 700 gp 5 days
Extra-Healing 800 gp 4 days
Rare potions that are not always available
Name Price Time
Heroism 500 gp 3 days
Invulnerability 800 gp 4 days
Speed 1.000 gp 5 days
Super-heroism 1.000 gp 5 days
Vitality 1.000 gp 6 days
Giant Strength 1.400-2.000 gp 8 days
Elixir or Health 2.000 gp 10 days
Rare potions that are generally considered illegal to purchase in good/neutral aligned cities
Name Price Time
Levitation 500 gp 3 days
Dimunition 500 gp 3 days
Gaseous form 600 gp 3 days
Clairaudience 700 gp 3 days
Clairvoyance 700 gp 3 days
Invisibility 700 gp 3 days
Philter of Love 800 gp 2 days
Polymorph Self 800 gp 6 days
ESP 1000 gp 5 days
Human control 1.000 gp 5 days
Posted with Blogsy
are looking for a rare potion, you need to ask around and see if anyone has the formula. If you are
looking for a rare and illegal potion, you need to visit the shadier side of town and see if someone is willing to share. Prices of rare and illegal potions may be higher than the price listed.
As dark elves, things a bit different. You may normally purchase common potions, as they are
available with your house. If you want anything other than common potions, your house may not have it, and getting it outside of the house means making a really good contact at another House or heading down to Scumtown, and try your luck there.
Common potions that are always available in a big city
Name Price Time
Animal Control 400 gp 4 days
Climbing 400 gp 5 days
Healing 400 gp 2 days
Sweet Water 500 gp 2 days
Water Breathing 500 gp 4 days
Fire resistance 500 gp 3 days
Flying 700 gp 5 days
Extra-Healing 800 gp 4 days
Rare potions that are not always available
Name Price Time
Heroism 500 gp 3 days
Invulnerability 800 gp 4 days
Speed 1.000 gp 5 days
Super-heroism 1.000 gp 5 days
Vitality 1.000 gp 6 days
Giant Strength 1.400-2.000 gp 8 days
Elixir or Health 2.000 gp 10 days
Rare potions that are generally considered illegal to purchase in good/neutral aligned cities
Name Price Time
Levitation 500 gp 3 days
Dimunition 500 gp 3 days
Gaseous form 600 gp 3 days
Clairaudience 700 gp 3 days
Clairvoyance 700 gp 3 days
Invisibility 700 gp 3 days
Philter of Love 800 gp 2 days
Polymorph Self 800 gp 6 days
ESP 1000 gp 5 days
Human control 1.000 gp 5 days
Posted with Blogsy
Researching new spells
The rules below pertain only to wizards, specialist wizards, priests and clerics. Bards, rangers, paladins and other pseudo-casters do not have the discipline and knowledge to invent new spells.
First, one must find another spell. As a general rule, we should stick to not re-inventing everything, since the balancing of spells is very diffult. As such, if your caster wants a new spell, you should look at already published spells, such as those found in the Tome of Magic, Complete Wizards Handbook and the like. You pick a spell, and treat it as something your character has "invented" and then proceed to research it. If/when you succeed, you can add it to your spellbook/spell-list. In the case of clerics and priests, most spells from Tome of Magic are from spheres they can not cast. Thus, if you want the spell on your list, you need to be able to fit it to one of the spheres to which you have access.
All research must take place in a laboratory, where the researcher must spend 8 hours for it to count as a day. It is possible to interrupt research during the day, but nothing lower than 1/2-days will count towards the time needed to finish the spell. Spell research is lengthy and expensive.
Buying your own laboratory is expensive. A lab normally costs between 1000 og 10.000 gold pieces. The bigger and better the lab, the better chance of researching the spell. It is sometimes possible to rent a lab, but usually only if you have a very close connection to the person renting it out. Casters usually do not let anyone snoop around their precious labs. If at all possible such renting comes at a cost as well, never less than 1/10th of the value of the lab per week.
Then you need to research the spell. The normal price of spell research is 200-500 gp/spell-level/week. A spell takes a minimum of 1 week + 1 week/spell-level to research. So a 1st level spell takes a minimum of 2 weeks at 200-500 gp/week (400-1.000 gp) and a 3rd level spell takes a minimum of 4 weeks at 200-500 gp/week (800-2.000 gp) to research. The price of research is rolled random at the beginning of each week.
You must be able to pay the weekly rate at the start of a week for it to count. If you run out of money, it is possible to take up the research once you have gathered enough money to continue.
When the time is up (for example, the 2 weeks for a 1st level spell), the you and the DM rolls to see if the caster has made the new spell.
The roll is based on several things, such as the INT or WIS (depending on class) of the caster, his level, the level of the spell and of course the laboratory.
Chance to research a new spell in %: Lab modifier + INT + LVL - 2 x spell level
First, one must find another spell. As a general rule, we should stick to not re-inventing everything, since the balancing of spells is very diffult. As such, if your caster wants a new spell, you should look at already published spells, such as those found in the Tome of Magic, Complete Wizards Handbook and the like. You pick a spell, and treat it as something your character has "invented" and then proceed to research it. If/when you succeed, you can add it to your spellbook/spell-list. In the case of clerics and priests, most spells from Tome of Magic are from spheres they can not cast. Thus, if you want the spell on your list, you need to be able to fit it to one of the spheres to which you have access.
All research must take place in a laboratory, where the researcher must spend 8 hours for it to count as a day. It is possible to interrupt research during the day, but nothing lower than 1/2-days will count towards the time needed to finish the spell. Spell research is lengthy and expensive.
Buying your own laboratory is expensive. A lab normally costs between 1000 og 10.000 gold pieces. The bigger and better the lab, the better chance of researching the spell. It is sometimes possible to rent a lab, but usually only if you have a very close connection to the person renting it out. Casters usually do not let anyone snoop around their precious labs. If at all possible such renting comes at a cost as well, never less than 1/10th of the value of the lab per week.
Then you need to research the spell. The normal price of spell research is 200-500 gp/spell-level/week. A spell takes a minimum of 1 week + 1 week/spell-level to research. So a 1st level spell takes a minimum of 2 weeks at 200-500 gp/week (400-1.000 gp) and a 3rd level spell takes a minimum of 4 weeks at 200-500 gp/week (800-2.000 gp) to research. The price of research is rolled random at the beginning of each week.
You must be able to pay the weekly rate at the start of a week for it to count. If you run out of money, it is possible to take up the research once you have gathered enough money to continue.
When the time is up (for example, the 2 weeks for a 1st level spell), the you and the DM rolls to see if the caster has made the new spell.
The roll is based on several things, such as the INT or WIS (depending on class) of the caster, his level, the level of the spell and of course the laboratory.
Chance to research a new spell in %: Lab modifier + INT + LVL - 2 x spell level
Lab modifiers:
1.000 gp lab: 10%
2.000 gp lab: 15%
3.000 gp lab: 20%
4.000 gp lab: 25%
5.000 gp lab: 30%
6.000 gp lab: 35%
7.000 gp lab: 40%
8.000 gp lab: 45%
9.000 gp lab: 50%
10.000 gp lab: 55%
If you fail your roll, you need to research for another week, paying the additional cost, before you may attempt to complete your research.
onsdag den 25. juli 2012
Spell-casting and interruption
Houserule
During a round in which you cast a spell, you have no DEX modifier to your AC until after you have completed your spell.
If you are hit before we get to the start of your initiative, you do not lose the spell you were about to cast, you are simply interrupted. If you are hit during the casting phase, you lose your spell.
Example: Jack wants to cast Cure Light Wounds - casting time 5. He rolls a 4 for initiative. If Jack is hit from initiative 0 to initiative 3, he is interrupted. If he is hit from initiative 4 to initiative 9, he is interrupted AND loses the spell from memory.
Just like all other house-rules, we will evaluate it at some point and decide whether we keep it or not.
I am also thinking about some sort of mechanic so that casters do not lose all their spells (automatically) when they are knocked unconscious. Maybe a hard INT-check (half stat) to keep each spell? Dunno, think about it, and we will talk about it at the table. Although we need to make sure we are not only giving stuff to the casters. It just seems a bit counter-productive that every time a caster goes down, a party has two choices. Drag around some dead weight for the rest of the day, or take a looong rest. But maybe it's just part of the 2e experience?
2nd session: The Witch and the dungeon
3rd Moon, 18th day, year 4553
The very next morning, the T'orghs get assigned a guide, a goblin named Rot. He leads the brothers towards the house of the witch.
After just an hour's march, the T'orghs (and Rot) run into 5 orcs. With the help of Rot, who manages (by dumb luck) to slay an orc in one stroke, the T'orghs quickly kill the orcs. They find 5 pp on one of the orcs, carefully wrapped in an old piece of cloth, as if they were his greatest treasure.
As it is getting dark, Rot announces they are close to the witch's house, and that he would prefer to stay andwait. The request is denied, and they all close in on the house. There is a debate on whether to just burn down the house, but in the end, the T'orghs settle on knocking on the door - perhaps the witch has useful information.
The witch, which turns out to be an elven-looking woman, greets them, and bids them inside. She admits that she has poisoned the water-supply of the goblins, and flat out refuses to reverse the poisoning. She does say that she has no issues with dark elves, and that the brothers are free to go.
Raheem takes offense at that, and they attack her. She quickly turns into her true form, revealing her to be a hag!
A short battle ensues and the hag yields, saying she will make it worth their while to let her live. Not everyone is convinced this is the smartest thing to do, but in the end, the fight stops. She tells them, that she recently found the entrance to an ancient place, a temple of some sorts. If they let her live, she will show them the entrance to said place, which surely has riches. When this isn't enough, she gives them 300 gp as well. At some point, she also makes a remark that infuriates Raheem and he attacks her. But before he can kill her, he is hit by her magical eye power, that paralyses him in fear for 3 days and Raheem drops to the ground like a sack of potatoes. His brothers make no move to defend him once they realize that he isn't dead.
3 days is a long time however, so they convince the witch, who call herself Alicia, to lift his condition, which she does by enspelling a necklace and brewing a foul-smelling potion, that after checking that it isn't poison, they let her give Raheem. Raheem has to wear the necklace for 3 days, unless he wants to be paralysed once again. "Remove the necklace before the 3 days are up, and you will find yourself on the floor, paralysed for 3 days".
After dealing with the witch, they send Rot on his way home, to deliver the message that the water soon will be drinkable. The T'orghs then carry Raheem a bit away, before they give him the potion. Then they head towards the temple.
3rd Moon, 20th day, year 4553
After walking through the forest for a couple of days, the terrain becomes more hilly, and they find a 80 feet deep ravine that is supposed to hold the entrance. They climb down, and easily find the entrance, but just as they approach it, they are assaulted by a swarm of aggressive bats. The fight is long and two of the brothers almost die to the bats, but in the end Taluzik and Tagar stand their ground and the swarm flees back into the caves it came from.
3rd Moon, 22nd day, year 4553
After a couple of days of rest and replenishing of spells, the T'orghs are ready to enter the temple. Luckily for them, the only creatures that found them during their rest was worgs, big wolves, but they couldn't get down into the ravine, so they just stood and howled at the dark elves.
Entering the dungeon, they quickly realised they had several options. They decided to move in a single file in the 10' wide corridors, changing side occassionally. First they went east, where they found a room with a semi-destroyed statue of a humanoid with elf-like form. It was impossible to see the features of the face, but it seemed like a statue of a male, who had been holding something in his right hand. That had unfortunately also been destroyed, whatever that was. Below the statue was engraved:
Our god, the L....The rest has been hacked away. The brothers searched for secret doors, but no luck. They moved back towards the entrance, and then north, going up the stairs. There they found a big room, with a few stone benches to the sides, and a big well-looking hole in the middle of the room. Along the edge of the "well" there was magical runes, or the remains of them. The wizardly brother (can't find name!) identified them as part of some sort of imprisonement spell. As they were considering climbing down the "well", they were attacked by 4 skeletons coming from one of the passageways to the north. Taluzik tried to command them, but to no avail. Then, almost as soon as the T'orghs had dispatched the first wave of skeletons, the second wave arrived, and then a third. Each time, Taluzik tried to command the undead, and each time he couldn't summon the force of will. But the T'orghs still managed to deal with the skeletons and then went north, to see where they were coming from. There they found the remains of an armory, filled with rusty and broken weapons.
Taking the third passageway to the north, they ended up in a library, filled with 12 armed skeletons. Luckily for the T'orghs, they could position themselves so that only 4, then 2 skeletons could get to them and fight. Taluzik tried to command them, but yet again, he could not summon Asmodeus' power to a sufficient degree.
After destroying the skeletons, they searched the stone shelves which held mostly ruined books and dust, but they did manage to find a scroll-case....
mandag den 23. juli 2012
More musings on dndnext monster design
So, another L&L article on monster design is out (link) and Mike Mearls gives us some more insight on how monster design will be in the next edition of Dungeons and Dragons.
Monster XP direct relation of power. That's pretty much always how it has been, up until 4e, where the xp was solely based of level (and type). While 4e certainly had many things right, this was not one of them. Even when following the narrow guidelines of monster building, it was very easy to build monsters who were much more lethal than other monsters of the same level. So going back to a system where the xp is not soly based on level, is a good thing in my mind.
Apparently there are 3 types of monsters now (instead of 4 in 4e). The mook (please change that name FTLOG), the elite and the solo. I love that they have kept the elite and solo monsters invented for 4e. Even though solos didn't always work, often requiring a lot of work-arounds to function optimally, they improved the DMs ability to make cool monsters. I am not sure how I feel about the types being tied to size. Mooks as small and medium creatures mostly works, but sometimes, at least in 4e, it was pretty cool to make a master swordsman as an elite creature. Now, as long as the above is just guidelines, it's all good, you can still do this. The problem is if it becomes a "rule" and there is an equivalent to the monster builder. On the other hand, making large creatures elite by default does make some sense.
Regarding the statistics, I am a bit torn. While I do like the narrower stat-range they have said they were introducing, mostly because fighters running around with natural STR30 just seems silly, I do think there should be a bit more leeway when it comes to monsters. In another word, I do expect a minotaur to be stronger than the strongest human. Then again, it might work as hill giants have STR 20. Minotaurs shouldn't be as strong as hill giants.
The article also tells us that monsters do follow some sort of realism again, meaning that the minotaur uses a greataxe and thus uses a d12 for damage (since the greataxe does 1d12 damage when a PC wields it), but because it is a large creature, it adds an additional die. This means we can guestimate other monsters, that we have not seen yet. For example, a huge frost giant wielding a greataxe with STR 22 will be doing 3d12+6 damage or a huge hill giant using a clue (and STR 20) will be doing around 3d8+5 damage. Although Mearls did mention the possibility of making it less accurate (and perhaps make it deal more damage?), so perhaps 4d8+5 or something. Is a club even d8? No idea, perhaps we are looking at 4d6+5 or something, although that would barely make it harder hitting than the minotaur. Anyway, I lost my train of thought there for a sec, but the point I was going to make was the following. While there will certainly be a lot who are happy that monster damage is once again more realistic, I am not one who cares. While there was other 4e-isms that broke my suspension of belief, monster damage was not one of them. I do like the simple rule of adding another die when it's made for a large creature. Should make it simple to use stuff like enlarge (maybe it will become "make large spell" instead) and so on.
In 3.x there was an issue with monsters with high CON-scores. If you leveled said monster, it would get a huuuuge number of hit points, as each die triggered the high CON hit point bonus. That problem was fixed in 4e, and it seems they have nerfed it even more now. The flattening of the stats combined with the fact that monsters get their con bonus on top of their hit point total (twice if they are elite, presumably x4 if solos), should ensure that we do not end up with monsters with an abnormal number of hit points, while still providing some variation.
I also really like that monster base HD is based on size, not on type. Somehow it just makes more sense. I had some trouble with huge or gargantuan lurker dragons in 4e which had hundreds of hit points less than other dragons of the same size and strength. Don't get me wrong, I am a big fan of the brute-controller-soldier-lurker-artillery templates, but I don't think hit points should necessarily be tied to them.
The bit about AC doesn't tell us much, aside from the fact that there are guidelines for which AC a monster of a certain level should have, and that there too, is now more realism in the AC than in 4e.
The abilities look easy to use and fun enough. But the minotaur was never the hardest monster to make suitable. Still looking forward seeing how they will make a complex monster, without making it too complex. I also look forward to the storehouse of iconic abilities, that sounds like all kinds of awesome for the DM. Most of all, I look forward to see how much of all these guestimates we will have to do ourselves and how much will be available as suggestions and explanations.
All in all, this was a much better "monster design" article than the previous ones, and it definitely helped me wrap my little head around their process. I am anxiously waiting for more, and definitely hope future playtests will incorporate some measure of monster building, just like character building will be available. After all, as a DM, I do 100 times more monster building than my players do character building.
Monster XP direct relation of power. That's pretty much always how it has been, up until 4e, where the xp was solely based of level (and type). While 4e certainly had many things right, this was not one of them. Even when following the narrow guidelines of monster building, it was very easy to build monsters who were much more lethal than other monsters of the same level. So going back to a system where the xp is not soly based on level, is a good thing in my mind.
Apparently there are 3 types of monsters now (instead of 4 in 4e). The mook (please change that name FTLOG), the elite and the solo. I love that they have kept the elite and solo monsters invented for 4e. Even though solos didn't always work, often requiring a lot of work-arounds to function optimally, they improved the DMs ability to make cool monsters. I am not sure how I feel about the types being tied to size. Mooks as small and medium creatures mostly works, but sometimes, at least in 4e, it was pretty cool to make a master swordsman as an elite creature. Now, as long as the above is just guidelines, it's all good, you can still do this. The problem is if it becomes a "rule" and there is an equivalent to the monster builder. On the other hand, making large creatures elite by default does make some sense.
Regarding the statistics, I am a bit torn. While I do like the narrower stat-range they have said they were introducing, mostly because fighters running around with natural STR30 just seems silly, I do think there should be a bit more leeway when it comes to monsters. In another word, I do expect a minotaur to be stronger than the strongest human. Then again, it might work as hill giants have STR 20. Minotaurs shouldn't be as strong as hill giants.
The article also tells us that monsters do follow some sort of realism again, meaning that the minotaur uses a greataxe and thus uses a d12 for damage (since the greataxe does 1d12 damage when a PC wields it), but because it is a large creature, it adds an additional die. This means we can guestimate other monsters, that we have not seen yet. For example, a huge frost giant wielding a greataxe with STR 22 will be doing 3d12+6 damage or a huge hill giant using a clue (and STR 20) will be doing around 3d8+5 damage. Although Mearls did mention the possibility of making it less accurate (and perhaps make it deal more damage?), so perhaps 4d8+5 or something. Is a club even d8? No idea, perhaps we are looking at 4d6+5 or something, although that would barely make it harder hitting than the minotaur. Anyway, I lost my train of thought there for a sec, but the point I was going to make was the following. While there will certainly be a lot who are happy that monster damage is once again more realistic, I am not one who cares. While there was other 4e-isms that broke my suspension of belief, monster damage was not one of them. I do like the simple rule of adding another die when it's made for a large creature. Should make it simple to use stuff like enlarge (maybe it will become "make large spell" instead) and so on.
In 3.x there was an issue with monsters with high CON-scores. If you leveled said monster, it would get a huuuuge number of hit points, as each die triggered the high CON hit point bonus. That problem was fixed in 4e, and it seems they have nerfed it even more now. The flattening of the stats combined with the fact that monsters get their con bonus on top of their hit point total (twice if they are elite, presumably x4 if solos), should ensure that we do not end up with monsters with an abnormal number of hit points, while still providing some variation.
I also really like that monster base HD is based on size, not on type. Somehow it just makes more sense. I had some trouble with huge or gargantuan lurker dragons in 4e which had hundreds of hit points less than other dragons of the same size and strength. Don't get me wrong, I am a big fan of the brute-controller-soldier-lurker-artillery templates, but I don't think hit points should necessarily be tied to them.
The bit about AC doesn't tell us much, aside from the fact that there are guidelines for which AC a monster of a certain level should have, and that there too, is now more realism in the AC than in 4e.
The abilities look easy to use and fun enough. But the minotaur was never the hardest monster to make suitable. Still looking forward seeing how they will make a complex monster, without making it too complex. I also look forward to the storehouse of iconic abilities, that sounds like all kinds of awesome for the DM. Most of all, I look forward to see how much of all these guestimates we will have to do ourselves and how much will be available as suggestions and explanations.
All in all, this was a much better "monster design" article than the previous ones, and it definitely helped me wrap my little head around their process. I am anxiously waiting for more, and definitely hope future playtests will incorporate some measure of monster building, just like character building will be available. After all, as a DM, I do 100 times more monster building than my players do character building.
Abonner på:
Opslag (Atom)