my profile | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Wizards.Com Boards   » Wheel of Time   » UtDB Critique (Page 2)

 
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
Author Topic: UtDB Critique
Xythlord
Member
Member # 70903



posted August 17, 2002 08:48 PM      Profile for Xythlord   Email Xythlord    Edit/Delete Post
Just print out what you want them to have and not the rest. Treat them like mushrooms, keep them in the dark and feed them $h!t. [Devilish]

--------------------
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955)

From: Denver, Co | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Grayswandir_Blade
Member
Member # 92933



posted August 17, 2002 09:11 PM      Profile for Grayswandir_Blade   Email Grayswandir_Blade    Edit/Delete Post
Drothgery, I agree with what a lot of other people are saying...yes, this is a critique thread, but not hack-and-slash the suggestions and hard work by saying "this is bad, this sucks, etc." without suggesting ways they can be revised. I fully understand your issues with things that simply don't make sense with WoT novel mechanics. However, I don't for a moment respect your throwing out weaves/items/creatures/etc. simply because they don't appear in the novels. Why? Because, quite frankly, WotC covered 90% of what's already _in_ the novels! An E for effort is certainly in order, in that nothing absolutely massively huge went wrong in the RPG. Granted, they didn't do very well in some places, but they covered most of what they could...and the _need_ for new weaves is great. There simply aren't enough, and scratching a weave out because it mimics a D&D effect is like saying "I want more weaves, but I won't accept any more." Open up the imagination a bit, and ask yourself not what RJ has exclusively said can be done with the OP, but rather what *might* work with the OP. $0.02

Anyway, on to the point of my post...and I'll be a bit general, since I don't have access to any of my stuff right now. About the Noble class. As someone already said, making the use-once-only ability into a check is a big plus for that class. There are only two problems: one, the check isn't significant enough, and two, there's too much gain at level 1.

The first problem is that the Queen of Andor only has about a 25% better chance of getting what she wants than a low-ranking Tairen noble kid. Now, I don't know if the SW rules (that someone said this class was copied from) include bonuses for titles and stuff, but I'd suggest something a little more linear. For example, giving the Noble a plus every level or every other level, then bumping the DC. This would make leveling in Noble much more significant in influence.

The second problem I have with the new Noble class (and one of the reasons I suggest making the check a more linear bonus) is the "magical" ability to request stuff at 1st level that doesn't get much better later on. I know this changes with good background and character RP, but simply taking a single Noble class level allows you power represented in a mechanic that's not otherwise gained. In other words, you get all the big guns at the front door. It makes it less appealing to go on in the class instead of stopping after you get the biggest benefit.

So, my final suggestion is this: make the plus a per-level gain and bump the DC. Then use the old "plus" levels to set categories for what degree of request you could ask for (steal/buy something, kill someone, raise an army). That way you won't have a Tairen minor noble succeed at having a fortress built and end up with the Queen of Andor turned down when she asks for...bleh, something simple, since I'm brain-fried right now. Heh. Another $0.02

[ August 17, 2002, 09:19 PM: Message edited by: Grayswandir_Blade ]

--------------------
"We laugh in the face of danger, just before it hits us and knocks us out" - Lysander.
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:

Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
drothgery
Member
Member # 4490


posted August 18, 2002 06:56 AM      Profile for drothgery      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Philosopher Jack:
If I understand your argument, it is okay to model a D&D spell (even word for word) if that weave is seen or mentioned in the novels, but a fan who creates a weave must ensure that it is nothing like a D&D spell. Damn, Dave, with those rules I wonder why we even bothered with the netbook.

You're misreading me. I dislike weaves modeled on D&D spells when they clearly do things that are in whole categories of magic that no one in WoT uses. And when I saw a weave that both seemed like a copy of one of the most broken spells in D&D and seemed to use a kind of effect that no one has done with the Power, it seemed like someone was trying to import a broken D&D spell as a power grab.

I think that the novels at the very least give an outline of the kinds of things that are possible with the One Power. Big elemental effects are easy. Healing and mind-altering effects are hard. Summoning is impossible. Necromancy is a True Power-only thing, and only the Dark One can bring back the dead. Really altering a living thing (ala Polymorph in D&D) is impossible. Creating magical objects is hard. Altering objects is not.

Along these lines, I don't think short-term 'power-up'/buff weaves along the lines of Haste or Bull's Strength exist. We've seen Aes Sedai and Warders in combat a lot, and no one has ever used one. Besides, weaves like that would be a mind-bogglingly cheesy way of circumventing the Second Oath.

--------------------
Dave Rothgery
Picking nits since 1976
drothgery@alum.wpi.edu
http://drothgery.editthispage.com/
Optional d20 WoT Rules at http://home.san.rr.com/drothgery/wot_rpg.htm

From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged
aoMalandra
Member
Member # 70086


posted August 18, 2002 07:29 AM      Profile for aoMalandra   Email aoMalandra    Edit/Delete Post
The Renew Weave shows us that it is possible to alter the bodies abilities at a high price for the user. Something like haste is a combat related weave and most combat channelers are fairly weak in the heal talent. Since the Yellow Ajah would have little general use for this weave it would not be common. It is possible that a few Channelers with the heal talent and lots of combat experience could have developed the weave as a personal and therefore rare weave. As for it being a cheesy way around the 2nd oath, Aes Sedai excell at finding ways around them.

Also a word about the amount of rare and lost weaves. Personally I don't have a problem with this because a lot of them are becoming common by Winters Heart (traveling for instance).

Note to Eosin: Let me know what other stuff you'd like to see fleshed out for mass combat rules. I have a bunch of other stuff that was discarded when my group play tested the system for the Battle of Tarwin's Gap. What we ended up with is the simplest version that allowed all players to get into it without to much difficulty which was my goal. I did not set out to create a minitures battle system with terrain mods and the like although such things can easily be plugged in. I'm glad you liked it. I think the stregnth of the system is that numbers are taken into account. 1,000 Shienaran's although supperior warriors will find themselves in a lot of trouble against 10,000 Trollocs. Anyway I'll be glad to provide any other info you'd like to get.

Malandra

Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Xythlord
Member
Member # 70903



posted August 18, 2002 07:52 AM      Profile for Xythlord   Email Xythlord    Edit/Delete Post
I really like this system you created, especially the add in the UtDB Errata. This way we can have a nice large battle and still have heroics. What other stuff did you have for it?

--------------------
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955)

From: Denver, Co | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Ghaerdon Fain
Member
Member # 90264



posted August 18, 2002 08:40 AM      Profile for Ghaerdon Fain   Email Ghaerdon Fain    Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by drothgery:
[QUOTE] I dislike weaves modeled on D&D spells when they clearly do things that are in whole categories of magic that no one in WoT uses.

Ok, I started this thread, it was inevitable that someone would. I agree in principal with what drothgery is saying but, like others, not the tenor. And for that matter many are now jumping down his throat... hence the reason why I gave my warning; and so did Eosin.

Look we have strayed as a thread (he says trying not to sound like a moderator [Roll Eyes] ). The point of this is not to focus on one opinion. Thats what most of the thread has been. All I ask was that we as a collective figure out what we thought worked really well and would definitely include and what we absolutely would not. Drothgery has lived up to his sig. and is picking nits. FINE! He's also told us all what he thinks ans why...

OK moving on...

--------------------
"My Brother? By the Light, I've never seen this darkfriend before!"
Go to my "Tiny Wheel of Time"; http://pages.globetrotter.net/pastor/wot.html

From: Basse Cote Nord, Quebec | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Philosopher Jack
Member
Member # 95890



posted August 18, 2002 09:15 AM      Profile for Philosopher Jack      Edit/Delete Post
Dave,

You make some very good points and I apologize for taking umbrage at your opinions. I agree that there are whole categories of magic that would violate RJ's unwritten rules concerning the One Power, including summoning and, especially, anything necromantic in nature. I think that, by and large, the One Power is a hammer. It is far easier to destroy with it than to create, but a skilled user can use that hammer to create. That skill is just difficult and rare.

As far as using weaves modelled on D&D spells, either intentionally or unintentionally, I think we can leave that up to the individual users of the netbook. Let's continue the discussion about what is appropriate and within the framework of the novels with more level heads and not-quite-so sharp tongues. I think this discussion will bear fruit when/if we ever decide, as a community, to create another netbook.

From: Bellingham, WA | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Jak Shadow
Member
Member # 39941



posted August 19, 2002 04:31 AM      Profile for Jak Shadow   Email Jak Shadow    Edit/Delete Post
Damn, reading some of those responses to Dave I'm getting images of a legion of Simpsons Lenin's. *Smashes out of glass coffin and lurches off zombie-syle* "Must-crush-critics. Rargh!!!"

Dave has made a number of critical comments about some of the content of the netbook but he has beacked up each and everyone of them with reasons. It's not like he's said "this is all cr@p and should be thrown out." He's said, "I don't like this becasue of this" and, quite frankly, his reasoning is pretty much valid. He does have experience with fan generated material and with DMing the RPG and, until now apparently, his opinions have always been considered valuable and well thought out.

So basically, lay off! It isn't necessary, warrented or, quite frankly, wanted.

--------------------
"I'm not feeling very well, it must be the anthrax." ~ Saturday night Delta Green, GenCon UK

From: London, UK | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
aoMalandra
Member
Member # 70086


posted August 19, 2002 06:16 AM      Profile for aoMalandra   Email aoMalandra    Edit/Delete Post
I think you wrong in this instance Jak, Dave does deserve the critisism he's getting not beccause he critisized peoples work but because of how he did it.

I have enjoyed Dave's material from the start but that doesn't mean he's always right. He starts off his post with a list of 5 things that bugged him abut the netbook and even though I don't agree with all 5 of his points they are valid and well thought out points. Dave goes on to day and I quote "So here's what id've eliminated from the netbook" and goes on to name a long list of items with reasons for it. The word "eliminate" is very strong and implies that the materials listed below sucked so bad that they don't merit viewing by the community. I hope that that wasn't Dave's intent so if it wasn't he should say that that phasing was a bad choice of words. I agree with some of the things that Dave said under the list and disagree with a lot of it and thats ok, thats just our opinions, but I object to him invalidating peoples work by saying it is worthy of "elimination".

Being a critic isn't easy, you sould expect to recieve critisism but I think that their hasn't been any flaming here and thats good.

Malandra

Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Ghaerdon Fain
Member
Member # 90264



posted August 19, 2002 06:28 AM      Profile for Ghaerdon Fain   Email Ghaerdon Fain    Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by aoMalandra:
The word "eliminate" is very strong and implies that the materials listed below sucked so bad that they don't merit viewing by the community.

We're now just being silly. "Dave" does not deserve this what so ever! Nobody does. He was honest. So what if he "eliminated" anything. Isn't that the purpose of this thread to get what people have discarded? This aint the Bible... and even that is critically questioned. This is no sacred cow. There's great stuff and stuff that is questionable. Dave did that. This is a critical review of the content just like with the Core book and with PotD!!! And we ripped that apart. You don't see such passionate offence discribed when we trashed it.

droth. has every right. Who else has "eliminated" or will not be using stuff and why? Why keep other stuff as standard? I use Ishamael's Weave Pool; powerful and reflects the books. So not everyone does. I hope that 20 posts won't trash me for it [Bored]

Now lets move on with this thread, please.

--------------------
"My Brother? By the Light, I've never seen this darkfriend before!"
Go to my "Tiny Wheel of Time"; http://pages.globetrotter.net/pastor/wot.html

From: Basse Cote Nord, Quebec | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
aoMalandra
Member
Member # 70086


posted August 19, 2002 07:02 AM      Profile for aoMalandra   Email aoMalandra    Edit/Delete Post
As I said in several of my post I do not discount Dave's opinions and critism, they are valid. And if Dave meant to say that he is "eliminating" stuff from his campaign thats one thing, but thats not what it sounded like, it sounded like he was saying that the stuff on his list shouldn't have been in the netbook in the first place. That may not have been the intent but reading the post certainly leaves that impression especially if you don't know the person writing the post. This is likely a situalion of miscomunication, droth can clear it up by simply clarifying what he meant by the quote I posted above, I don't think anyone is faulting him for his opinions on specific aspects of the book although some might want to defend their work.

Malandra

Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Jak Shadow
Member
Member # 39941



posted August 19, 2002 07:13 AM      Profile for Jak Shadow   Email Jak Shadow    Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Ghaerdon Fain:
quote:
Originally posted by aoMalandra:
The word "eliminate" is very strong and implies that the materials listed below sucked so bad that they don't merit viewing by the community.

Now lets move on with this thread, please.

I the spirit of this I shall refrain from commenting on the other.

--------------------
"I'm not feeling very well, it must be the anthrax." ~ Saturday night Delta Green, GenCon UK

From: London, UK | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
aoMalandra
Member
Member # 70086


posted August 19, 2002 07:26 AM      Profile for aoMalandra   Email aoMalandra    Edit/Delete Post
hehe, sometimes when I get something caught in my beak I have a hard time letting go. I'm sorry I kept puching, this is how simple misunderstandings get blown out of proportion, someone who means well just keeps pushing instead of just letting go. This is a great community and droth has been one of its leading members for a long time. Please accept my apology Dave for getting overly excited when nothing bad was meant.

Malandra

Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Ghaerdon Fain
Member
Member # 90264



posted August 19, 2002 09:21 AM      Profile for Ghaerdon Fain   Email Ghaerdon Fain    Edit/Delete Post
I continue to be proud and priviaged to be part of this community. I have found that we can get "into" it but equally be humble enough to admit that we can be led astray. Thanks all.

After some play testing I think I'm going to go with Randy Madden's Wolfbrother Madness system. Any challenges [Big Grin] [Dubious] So... which do we collectively use? Again, not to knock the options out there, just the majority [Wink] .

--------------------
"My Brother? By the Light, I've never seen this darkfriend before!"
Go to my "Tiny Wheel of Time"; http://pages.globetrotter.net/pastor/wot.html

From: Basse Cote Nord, Quebec | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Eagle Prince
Member
Member # 67693



posted August 19, 2002 06:38 PM      Profile for Eagle Prince   Email Eagle Prince    Edit/Delete Post
Haven't read the whole thing yet, but here's the stuff that really jumped out at me.

I agree with what someone else said above, the Dai'dore class was something needed imo... alot of swashbuckler types in WoT, and this lets you start one from the get-go.

Noble- I think most anyone would have done this... needed, recommended, etc. Someone above mentioned it might be front-loaded, so I'll keep that in mind.

Alot of good PrCs... I had one question looking through them though... what does the Friend of the Dark's "Authority" ability do? Couldn't find it anywhere.

Class-combos, already saw them. Good examples of how to set up a character the way you want with multiclassing.

Bad-guy temples, not exactly how I would have done them... but pretty close.

Haven't looked through the sword-forms really. But off my head, I like the idea of having a mechanic for sword forms. And the idea of some of them needing the Old Blood feat was really awesome.

Haven't looked through all the feats. Noticed the mining one, and like it. I've played alot of "miners" in WoT games, so just the idea of having a feat for it was cool to me. And for the question of balance mentioned above, looks balanced to me. +2 strength is good for a feat, but it also gives -2 cha and you can only take it at first level. Fair/balanced/in good flavor/etc imo. As for the ability talent feats... yes there is dnd Epic feats that do this, but if you note, those are also a simple +1 to the attribute, which is powerful. The talent feats are a +1 inherent bonus, that's a huge difference. Inherent bonus is not unheard of in the "official" WoTRPG... and if you droped those same feats into a DnD game, I doubt if anyone would take them. However, inherent bonus is harder to get in WoT, so in the end I would argue that the feats are worthwhile without being "overpowered".

The feats like instant embrace/etc... people have been hammering out those feats since the game came out. So even if a minority doesn't like them, or finds them overpowered, obviously many people do want them, and thus a very good idea to put them in the netbook. Like I said, haven't really looked through all of them, but they look decent for the most part. Also, I saw the Animal Talker feat mentioned above... and I would argue that this does hold a place in WoT. Handle Animial lets you train them, this seams like the feat for someone who's instead accepted by them, and so has an intuitive sense to talk to animals. There's people who are kind of like this in real life, and with Wolfbrothers and being in a fantasy setting, it's no stretch of the imagination to have such a thing. I like it, I'd let a player take it in my game.

Wolfbrother feats... makes more sense then the PrC... but it would still be a hard choice, to spend all my feats for the feat chain, or take the PrC and spend my feats on Dreamwalking stuff or whatever else. Wolfbrother madness... I think I already asked on the boards if anyone had some, so I was glad to see it. Which reminds me of the "two options" deal. Some people have said this was a bad idea, but since it is a netbook and not the official product, I think it was a good choice by the editing team, as one might appeal to a group more then the other.

Weaves... only glanced at them. However, from previous posts I can say a few things. About "shapechanging", this did happen one time in the books, Rahvin doing it to Rand. You might argue that it was in the World of Dreams, but he was there in the flesh. And it did, in fact, seem like an act of the Power. Also, Slayer is able to shapechange at will. The first WoT campaign I ran (about the time the Great Hunt came out), one of the PCs became a Wolfbrother and eventually had a way of entering the wolfdream and exiting as a wolf. So you might argue different, or argue that it is only possible in the world of dreams... but it is there, even if in a limited form. Also, on replacing/tricking memories, summoning creatures, etc... This is a very big thing in WoT. Mind control/manipulation does happen in WoT, and it happens alot. Nearly anything you could think of that deals with it, is possible with the One Power IMO. For those who disagree, I believe they simply have a very rigid view of the world of the WoT and are unaccepting of anything the don't think fits it, even if it does. And as for a weave/etc being half-based of something similiar from DnD, or Star Wars, etc... the OFFICIAL game was, how is this suprising you??? Unless you are really going to arge that, lets say Noble and Wanderer classes, weren't heavily based of Star Wars classes... LoL. Not to mention, it makes said weave probably that much more balanced, and if you play alot of DnD then you already know what sort of problems can/might come of it, and how to deal with them.

Ter'angreal stuff... only looked at one or two. The iron stomach one sticks out. Anyway, the more the better. I only wish they had a price or something, just for a quick, vague idea of how powerful it is and about which level it should come up. I've heard alot of hardcore WoT'er say that more isn't better, because they are so rare. [Eek!] Which really boggles me, as PCs are supposed to be the "unique" special-case people who do have them. The same way book characters are. And looking at the book characters, they have bagloads of them. (If you don't believe me, you really need to read through it again and take a closer look. Because all the big-guns have a small museum-type collection of them.)

Only read through the Trouble with Tinkers. Looks alright, but the name really got me. ("The Trouble with Tribbles"). Now I have to use it just because of the name. heh.

The tables at the end... man I don't envy whoever did that, but they really kick ass. Makes the whole thing managable, exp. if you don't want to print out the entire thing (just print out the tables and keep the computer on [Smile] )

Anyway, just a bit of what I thought. Overall very impressive. And even if everything isn't exactly how I would have done it, at the least nobody can argue that it won't give them an insane ammount of new ideas to build up a horde of new material that "meets their group's expectations/view of WoT".

[Devilish]

--------------------
I am the Immortal One hidden from the dawn, I am the Emperor-King after day has gone.

From: Utah | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Merclaar
Member
Member # 67223



posted August 19, 2002 10:33 PM      Profile for Merclaar      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Eagle Prince:
I agree with what someone else said above, the Dai'dore class was something needed imo... alot of swashbuckler types in WoT, and this lets you start one from the get-go.

Agreement here.

quote:
Fair/balanced/in good flavor/etc imo. As for the ability talent feats... yes there is dnd Epic feats that do this, but if you note, those are also a simple +1 to the attribute, which is powerful. The talent feats are a +1 inherent bonus, that's a huge difference. Inherent bonus is not unheard of in the "official" WoTRPG... and if you droped those same feats into a DnD game, I doubt if anyone would take them. However, inherent bonus is harder to get in WoT, so in the end I would argue that the feats are worthwhile without being "overpowered".

Sorry I haven't (yet) the ELH, but why is this inherent so bad???

quote:
Weaves... only glanced at them. However, from previous posts I can say a few things. About "shapechanging", this did happen one time in the books, Rahvin doing it to Rand. You might argue that it was in the World of Dreams, but he was there in the flesh. And it did, in fact, seem like an act of the Power.

Disagreement here, IMHO it was a World of Dreams act, like Egwenes and Amys first encounter (the strip ;-) )

quote:
Also, Slayer is able to shapechange at will.

Slayer is a creature from the Dark One, nothing to do with the One Power.

quote:
The first WoT campaign I ran (about the time the Great Hunt came out), one of the PCs became a Wolfbrother and eventually had a way of entering the wolfdream and exiting as a wolf. So you might argue different, or argue that it is only possible in the world of dreams... but it is there, even if in a limited form.

I argue, it can be, but not with weaves...

quote:

Also, on replacing/tricking memories, summoning creatures, etc... This is a very big thing in WoT. Mind control/manipulation does happen in WoT, and it happens alot. Nearly anything you could think of that deals with it, is possible with the One Power IMO. For those who disagree, I believe they simply have a very rigid view of the world of the WoT and are unaccepting of anything the don't think fits it, even if it does.



Agreement here. IMHO the WoT Compulsion is a sort of hypnosis without Emergency brake.

quote:
And as for a weave/etc being half-based of something similiar from DnD, or Star Wars, etc... the OFFICIAL game was, how is this suprising you??? Unless you are really going to arge that, lets say Noble and Wanderer classes, weren't heavily based of Star Wars classes... LoL. Not to mention, it makes said weave probably that much more balanced, and if you play alot of DnD then you already know what sort of problems can/might come of it, and how to deal with them.

Whats your point here? *little confused* It's clear WoT is heavly D&D and SW based. But it should/must have a base on Robert Jordans WoT....

quote:

I've heard alot of hardcore WoT'er say that more isn't better, because they are so rare. [Eek!] Which really boggles me, as PCs are supposed to be the "unique" special-case people who do have them. The same way book characters are. And looking at the book characters, they have bagloads of them. (If you don't believe me, you really need to read through it again and take a closer look. Because all the big-guns have a small museum-type collection of them.)



Shure the have bagloads, but bagloads of thinks they can't use [Big Grin] .

quote:
The tables at the end... man I don't envy whoever did that, but they really kick ass. Makes the whole thing managable, exp. if you don't want to print out the entire thing (just print out the tables and keep the computer on [Smile] )

Agreement here.

quote:
Anyway, just a bit of what I thought. Overall very impressive. And even if everything isn't exactly how I would have done it, at the least nobody can argue that it won't give them an insane ammount of new ideas to build up a horde of new material that "meets their group's expectations/view of WoT".
[Devilish]

And also a 'Agreement here'.

In my imagination the One Power is a science not magic.
In the world of dreams you dream.
The true power use anothers Laws of nature. The prison from the dark one is outside the Wheel of Time...

All IMHO! [Smile]

cu

[ August 19, 2002, 10:40 PM: Message edited by: Merclaar ]

--------------------
cu

--
Merclaar

Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Eagle Prince
Member
Member # 67693



posted August 19, 2002 11:26 PM      Profile for Eagle Prince   Email Eagle Prince    Edit/Delete Post
@inherent bonuses. In a WoT game, they are more valuable then in DnD, but only because they're harder to get in WoT. But speaking strictly DnD, a +1 unnamed bonus is alot better then a +1 inherent bonus to a stat (in truth, an unnamed bonus is always superior to a named bonus). Now in the ELH there is alot of new feats, many of them general, and most all of them epic. Epic feats can only be taken by epic-level characters (level 21+), and are generally stronger then regular feats. There are a series of feats, "great strength/great intelligence/etc" which gives +1 to your attribute. This is an unnamed bonus, which means it stacks with all other bonuses (ie, if you have a +2 enhancement bonus from one thing and a +4 enhancement bonus from something else, you only get the higest one; +4, not +6). So, let's say your character is starting at level 30. He will have 4,300,000 gold pieces to start play with, which he can by magical and mudane equipment/property/etc with. For 825,000gp he could get a +5 inherent bonus to all his attributes (+5 is the highest inherent bonus you can get through any means... and as I said before, a +3 inherent bonus from one thing and a +2 inherent bonus from something else wouldn't give you a +5 inherent bonus; you'd only get +3, the highest one).

So, a feat that gives a +1 inherent bonus to a stat in DnD isn't a very powerful feat. In fact, nobody who plans on reaching over probably 6th level would ever take it. However, an inherent bonus is worth more in WoT, because they are harder to get... but not to the point of it being overpowered. Powerful, sure... so is great cleave, improved critical, and sunder. -shrug-

Anyway, that's the basic argument with comparing it to the epic feat that grants an unnamed bonus.

--------------------
I am the Immortal One hidden from the dawn, I am the Emperor-King after day has gone.

From: Utah | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Eagle Prince
Member
Member # 67693



posted August 20, 2002 12:02 AM      Profile for Eagle Prince   Email Eagle Prince    Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Merclaar:

quote:
Weaves... only glanced at them. However, from previous posts I can say a few things. About "shapechanging", this did happen one time in the books, Rahvin doing it to Rand. You might argue that it was in the World of Dreams, but he was there in the flesh. And it did, in fact, seem like an act of the Power.

Disagreement here, IMHO it was a World of Dreams act, like Egwenes and Amys first encounter (the strip ;-) )

...

In my imagination the One Power is a science not magic.
In the world of dreams you dream.
The true power use anothers Laws of nature. The prison from the dark one is outside the Wheel of Time...

I don't look at the One Power so much as a science, I think of it as a magic easily explainable with science. But in general, I think we are in agreement here. Like you, I don't think shapechanging with the One Power is possible (and if it is/ends up being, I would equate it along the lines of how it works in the Coldfire Trilogy. One of the hardest things to do; in Coldfire it took absulute submission to magic, which the normal human mind couldn't... thus making it impossible to anyone, save a few superpowered immortals and the like). However, my point was this is a RPG, not the next novel. And with what we do know of shapechanging (something that is possible, somehow), if a gaming group wished to include such a thing, there does in fact happen to be some facts on the subject to make it half believable to WoT readers. For example, I do think Rahvin used the Power on Rand to shift him into Lews, but that this was only possible because they happened to be in the World of Dreams (we already know shapeshifting here is possible, just not all the details.) So you could in theory invent a weave for your campaign that made you shapeshift. To everyone else, it just looks like you morph from one form to another, but actually the weave is taking you into the World of Dreams, dreaming you into the new form, then returning you to reality. Now this might not actually be possible with whatever OP rules RJ has set up, but I think it's plenty good for a group who wants to use shapeshifting and still keep it WoT-flavored.

quote:
Originally posted by Merclaar:

quote:

I've heard alot of hardcore WoT'er say that more isn't better, because they are so rare. [Eek!] Which really boggles me, as PCs are supposed to be the "unique" special-case people who do have them. The same way book characters are. And looking at the book characters, they have bagloads of them. (If you don't believe me, you really need to read through it again and take a closer look. Because all the big-guns have a small museum-type collection of them.)



Shure the have bagloads, but bagloads of thinks they can't use [Big Grin] .


I think we are someone in agreement here. I don't think just because the players find a ter'angreal that they should know what it does. Or even that it is a ter'angreal. That's exactly how I'd run it in my game... they're only going to find out with some hard work and a bit of luck. But even approaching *angreal like this, I still find it the best interest of the game to have many writeups of them on-hand. I think it lessens the fun of the game if you've found the same ter'angreal in the last three campaigns... having so many that you probably won't get through half of them in three campaigns means the players will always be surprised and not know what to expect.

Now, your PCs could easily have 6 ter'angreal among them at level 8, by my reasoning. And I think it would be very in line with the world if they didn't know what any of them did, or maybe only one or two. But I also think it's very much in line with the novels for a single lvl 16 PC to have 6 him/herself, and know what 5 of them do (and uses them on a regular basis). Looking back on Winter's Heart, Nynaeve discovered what many of the ter'angreal she had did. And it was revealed that Cadsuane has a number of ter'angreal herself, which she regularly uses. Now these would both be high level NPCs... but I think PCs of the same level should have just as many toys. From a game-perspective, I think this is a good thing, as a 16th level character should have more to their name then 16 levels. They should have a long list of adventures, discoveries, character development. And I simply wanted to point this out, because even those who want to keep the game close to the truths of the story won't feel out of line by doing this under the notion that it's simply good for the game (and not matching with the story, which I am trying point out that it does this as well. Sort of a double bonus.)

--------------------
I am the Immortal One hidden from the dawn, I am the Emperor-King after day has gone.

From: Utah | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Merclaar
Member
Member # 67223



posted August 20, 2002 01:16 AM      Profile for Merclaar      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I don't look at the One Power so much as a science, I think of it as a magic easily explainable with science.
Where is the practical difference?
[Wink]

--------------------
cu

--
Merclaar

Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Grayswandir_Blade
Member
Member # 92933



posted August 20, 2002 09:25 PM      Profile for Grayswandir_Blade   Email Grayswandir_Blade    Edit/Delete Post
[edit away]

[ August 20, 2002, 09:26 PM: Message edited by: Grayswandir_Blade ]

--------------------
"We laugh in the face of danger, just before it hits us and knocks us out" - Lysander.
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:

Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged


All times are Pacific Time
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | http://www.wizards.com/ | Privacy Statement



Powered by Infopop Corporation
Ultimate Bulletin BoardTM 6.2.0

Shop Games Books Magazines Stores Events Company Worldwide Community