Class and Level Geekery IX: the thread levels up again!

[Feddlefew]

I always figured it was kind of like how most children are literally incapable of comprehending that people don't know what they know before a certain age, because the part of their brain that handles that isn't finished developing. Fast aging does has its advantages.

[Kish]

Yeah but I still find it really odd to think of an elf that had been adventuring for 120 years from age 115 would have learned less than an orc that fought for 30 from age 15. The 235 year old elf has less world experience than the 45 year old orc? Really? The elf who has been fighting life and death battles for over a century, since before the orc's grandparents were born? He gets less of a wis/int/cha modifier?

Your confusion is nothing compared to Vaarsuvius' outrage.

[bookguy]

This isn't anything recent, but shouldn't Belkar's wisdom be listed as exactly 9 rather than <=9 because of comic 58?

[Gitman00]

It does make sense for game balance reasons - the mental bonuses apply at the same time as the physical penalties, which are based on the life span of the creature in question. But on the other hand, life spans are pretty much only there for flavor anyway - the game wouldn't really change mechanically if all races aged at the same rate.

Of course, the whole question is more or less academic. How many D&D games go on long enough for a character to actually advance an age category?

EDIT @ bookguy:

This was discussed a while back. Strictly speaking, Belkar's Wisdom would have to be 10 going by that comic. CSW is a 4th-level Ranger spell. However, that contradics #475 where he claims to have an ability score penalty. It was decided that the more recent comic trumps the earlier one.

[Dark Matter]

His two castings of Heal had a lot of off-screen time in-between - more than enough to spend a round on activating Pearl Of Power 6. Same with Resurrections and Pearl of Power 7.

Wait, why do we think he has Pearl of Power?

[Flame of Anor]

This isn't anything recent, but shouldn't Belkar's wisdom be listed as exactly 9 rather than <=9 because of comic 58?

That's been brought up many times before. To make a long story short: we can't really make a call on that evidence.

[zimmerwald1915]

That's been brought up many times before. To make a long story short: we can't really make a call on that evidence.

More to the point, we have to throw out one bit of evidence for the whole to make sense. There are three bits: Belkar's Wisdom, the spell's level, and the spell's name. Either Belkar's Wisdom really was 10, or cure serious wounds was really a level 3 Ranger spell in the OOTSverse, or those weren't really scrolls of cure serious wounds. My preferred retcon is that they were really scrolls of cure moderate wounds and not cure serious wounds, but that's not exactly something that can be put in the opening post, so there's no point advocating it.

[Douglas]

More to the point, we have to throw out one bit of evidence for the whole to make sense. There are three bits: Belkar's Wisdom, the spell's level, and the spell's name. Either Belkar's Wisdom really was 10, or cure serious wounds was really a level 3 Ranger spell in the OOTSverse, or those weren't really scrolls of cure serious wounds. My preferred retcon is that they were really scrolls of cure moderate wounds and not cure serious wounds, but that's not exactly something that can be put in the opening post, so there's no point advocating it.

None of those bits have to be thrown out at all, provided that you interpret the scroll use rules as using the level of the spell on the scroll (which would almost certainly be from the cleric list, where it's level 3) to determine how high the ability score requirement is. I believe this is the correct interpretation. A lot of people agree with me. A lot of people don't.

Several threads ago this disagreement blew up into a giant borderline flame war, with everyone on all sides convinced they were unassailably correct and no progress made whatsoever.

We're nowhere near that level of argument yet this time, but it seems to me that we're heading in that direction. Therefore, could we all agree to just drop the subject again to avoid any possibility of thread lock?

[Gitman00]

None of those bits have to be thrown out at all, provided that you interpret the scroll use rules as using the level of the spell on the scroll (which would almost certainly be from the cleric list, where it's level 3) to determine how high the ability score requirement is. I believe this is the correct interpretation. A lot of people agree with me. A lot of people don't.

I would point out that the SRD entry on scrolls as magic items says nothing about the class of the scribe. As I understand it, a scroll of Cure Serious Wounds is a scroll of Cure Serious Wounds. A Ranger casts it as a Ranger, and a Cleric casts it as a Cleric. So for Belkar, it should always be a 4th-level spell.

But this is moot. Consensus was already reached that Comic 58 was ignoring the rules for the sake of the joke, and Comic 475 has more weight.

[Douglas]

I would point out that the SRD entry on scrolls as magic items says nothing about the class of the scribe. As I understand it, a scroll of Cure Serious Wounds is a scroll of Cure Serious Wounds. A Ranger casts it as a Ranger, and a Cleric casts it as a Cleric. So for Belkar, it should always be a 4th-level spell.

But this is moot. Consensus was already reached that Comic 58 was ignoring the rules for the sake of the joke, and Comic 475 has more weight.

For the effect of the spell, yes. The caster level and spell level of the scroll, however, which determine the price, save DC, and level-dependent variables, are set when the scroll is made by the one who made it. The scroll, independent of any hypothetical user, has a 3rd level spell on it at caster level 5.

...and that's all I'm going to say on the subject.

[Kurald Galain]

More to the point, we have to throw out one bit of evidence for the whole to make sense. There are three bits: Belkar's Wisdom, the spell's level, and the spell's name. Either Belkar's Wisdom really was 10, or cure serious wounds was really a level 3 Ranger spell in the OOTSverse, or those weren't really scrolls of cure serious wounds.

As pointed out above, by RAW, the level of a scroll is set by its creator, not its user.

[Draz74]

Even if it isn't on the rules, The Giant has shown to house-rule it that way, like when Xykon became Lich he felt a lot better, likely returning any penalties he had when he was alive.
Edit: Now that i've checked, Xykon has age bonuses, so why should Malack have them too?

I always thought him feeling a lot better was due to (a) having a font of dark negative power keeping him alive instead of biology (which I guess could be the same thing as "no longer having a Constitution score"), (b) gaining mental ability score bonuses as per the Lich template, and (c) being free of

Spoiler

Show

the anti-casting disease that Lirian had inflicted him with.

Never occurred to me that undoing aging penalties to his Strength and Dexterity would even be part of the reason. Just my 2 cents.

[SinsI]

Wait, why do we think he has Pearl of Power?

We are trying to pinpoint the minimum and maximum character level that corresponds to demonstrated levels of power. Thus, we cannot assume that he has no such common items.

[Ajadea]

A couple things I'm curious about:
Otiluke's Resilient Sphere is seen in #670 on the list O-Chul gives them.
Durkon's Strength is listed as 14-19, lower bound given because he can carry Vaarsuvius.
O-Chul has also been seen carrying V, but his minimum strength is apparently 11. Can anyone explain why?
Sabine is Haley's personal rival? Both strips linked mention Crystal.

[Kurald Galain]

I would point out that the SRD entry on scrolls as magic items says nothing about the class of the scribe. As I understand it, a scroll of Cure Serious Wounds is a scroll of Cure Serious Wounds. A Ranger casts it as a Ranger, and a Cleric casts it as a Cleric.

Actually, the SRD does mention it. A scroll's class and level does precisely depend on the scribe, and the scribe is assumed by default to be a wizard (for arcane scrolls) or a cleric or druid (for divine scrolls). The page points out that if a bard would make a scroll (e.g of Hideous Laughter), it would be a different, and lower level, scroll than if a wizard would make it. But, as the SRD states, bards, paladins and rangers "typically don’t involve themselves in scribing scrolls".

RAW is quite clear on this. And remember that we last debated this seven years ago, so it is fair to say that not everybody would remember that discussion. Regardless, people are allowed to change their minds in seven years. It is really not an argument that, since there was disagreement on this seven years ago we may not discuss it now.

[Kish]

Since we're apparently going here again, and without Wrecan this time:

Anyone who is about to advance an argument that Belkar should be listed as having a Wisdom of exactly 9, be aware that you're arguing that Belkar's wisdom is only slightly below average. If you still wish to do so, go ahead, but at least know what you're asserting.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

We are trying to pinpoint the minimum and maximum character level that corresponds to demonstrated levels of power. Thus, we cannot assume that he has no such common items.

Please define "common". It doesn't sound like this "Pearl of Power" is in the same category of the ten foot pole and rope that I would define as common items. If what you mean by "common" is "objects everyone agree that a PC of level X and above always buys" then, we have plenty of evidence that the order doesn't have most of those.

Without evidence that Durkon has purchased it, it is like the six rings of free movement that someone was suggesting the order should have bought. The OotS world doesn't seem to have well-stocked magical bazaars, and magic objects are mostly obtained on-screen, so far. For Thor's sake, they don't even seem to carry rope and ten foot poles, which every single PC I've ever played or seen played has carried.

Grey Wolf

[Kish]

If what you mean by "common" is "objects everyone agree that a PC of level X and above always buys" then, we have plenty of evidence that the order doesn't have most of those.

Starting with the fact that, "SinsI's apparent beliefs aside, there's no such thing."

Without evidence that Durkon has purchased it, it is like the six rings of free movement that someone was suggesting the order should have bought.

Psst--"someone" was the person you're addressing. So...yes, exactly like that.

[SinsI]

Please define "common". It doesn't sound like this "Pearl of Power" is in the same category of the ten foot pole and rope that I would define as common items. If what you mean by "common" is "objects everyone agree that a PC of level X and above always buys" then, we have plenty of evidence that the order doesn't have most of those.

Without evidence that Durkon has purchased it, it is like the six rings of free movement that someone was suggesting the order should have bought. The OotS world doesn't seem to have well-stocked magical bazaars, and magic objects are mostly obtained on-screen, so far. For Thor's sake, they don't even seem to carry rope and ten foot poles, which every single PC I've ever played or seen played has carried.

Grey Wolf

Common as in "listed in SRD" and "costs less than a third of their WBL".

And why "six rings of freedom of movement"? Just two, for the melee non-casters in the party - for Roy and Belkar. Belkar was grappled more than enough in combat (i.e. by Miko's mount) to understand its worth...

High level PCs have access to items that reduce spellcasting restrictions and effectiveness of certain game mechanics - the rules (and most of the challenges in source books) were made with that assumption, we just have to take it into account. You wouldn't argue that V absolutely doesn't have a ring of wizardry, would you?

[bookguy]

I'm sorry, I hadn't realized that the subject had already been discussed. I only started reading OotS about a year ago.

[Kish]

You wouldn't argue that V absolutely doesn't have a ring of wizardry, would you?

This is a dishonest argument, SinsI. Arguing that someone "absolutely doesn't" have something is not equivalent to arguing that someone is not established to have something. In your case, you want to have the characters listed as having a bunch of things there's no evidence for in the comics, because your concept of high-level adventurers "should" have those things. But you don't get to do "Prove they don't have these things, or list them as having them."

Vaarsuvius is established as having a Ring of Wizardry. Roy is not established as having a Ring of Free Action, nor has anything in the comic suggested as much. See the difference?

[Hunter548]

V's been stated in the course of the comic to have a Ring of Wizardry. The only evidence for Durkon having a Pearl of Power is your supposition that he might've acquired one, based on something that the comic repeatedly ignores. (Optimization)


On another note: Durkon includes Elan in "Weak willed", but doesn't include Roy, in 874. Given that bards have will saves as a primary save and fighters don't, does this mean Roy has some unspecified bonus to will saves/saves in general? Even with an 18 wisdom from Roy and a 8 wisdom from Elan, they'd still have an equal base bonus to will saves before gear/feats; +8 (Base on the minimum level the thread has established for them)

[Kish]

On another note: Durkon includes Elan in "Weak willed", but doesn't include Roy, in 874. Given that bards have will saves as a primary save and fighters don't, does this mean Roy has some unspecified bonus to will saves/saves in general?

Malack probably meant "those with poor Will saves," but I think Durkon understood it to mean something...less mechanical. Especially since, as you note, Roy's Will save shouldn't actually be better than Elan's even with the difference in their Wisdom.

[Feddlefew]

Malack probably meant "those with poor Will saves," but I think Durkon understood it to mean something...less mechanical. Especially since, as you note, Roy's Will save shouldn't actually be better than Elan's even with the difference in their Wisdom.

I'd be a little more worried about Elan's sense motive than his will save, personally.

[Flame of Anor]

Would the problem of Belkar's wisdom be solved if we decided that the scrolls he used were, by some unlikely chain of events, actually scribed by some unknown ranger?

[Shale]

It's also possible that OOTSverse Owl's Wisdom provides a substantially larger bonus than the RAW edition. (At least, when it would be funny for it to do so)

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Would the problem of Belkar's wisdom be solved if we decided that the scrolls he used were, by some unlikely chain of events, actually scribed by some unknown ranger?

I think that would make the problem worse. If I understand correctly, a ranger needs WIS 14 to cast that spell. A cleric, only 13. The disagreement is in a ranger casting a cleric spell from a scroll: does he require a ranger's WIS (because he is a ranger) or a cleric's WIS (because it's a cleric scroll).

But I'm with Kish here: 9 and 10 WIS both feel way too high for Belkar.
Edit: and with Shale. From now on, my headcanon is that V has a homebrewed version that gives 8 WIS to lemmings, and the regular amount to everyone else.

I'm sorry, I hadn't realized that the subject had already been discussed. I only started reading OotS about a year ago.

Not your fault at all. I suggest adding this topic to the FAQ, though.

Common as in "listed in SRD" and "costs less than a third of their WBL".

A third? That's a lot of money. Essentially, they have, what, 10 slots for magic items? And you consider common items they could only buy 3 of? Yeah, that doesn't sound like the OotS would splurge on.

You wouldn't argue that V absolutely doesn't have a ring of wizardry, would you?

No, of course not. V said he had one. Durkon hasn't said anything about having Pearls.

Grey Wolf

[EmperorSarda]

Ignoring the Belkar's wisdom discussion, I'm going to post the spells Malack has cast thus far.

0:
1:
2: Hold Person
3:
4: Poison
5: Flame Strike X2, Quickened Inflict Light Wounds
6: Greater Dispel Magic, Harm

So, if he casts one more 5th or 6th level spell, either his wisdom is in the 20-23 range (depending on what level spell he casts), or he is 12th level.

[Kish]

Remember that Harm is a Destruction doman spell.

[EmperorSarda]

Remember that Harm is a Destruction doman spell.

Correct. a cleric of at least 11th level and wisdom of 16, as we assume Malack to have, has 1 6th level spell and one 6th level domain spell.

As I said, if he casts another 5th or 6th level spell, then either his wisdom is higher or he is level 12.

Or were you just reminding me of it being a destruction domain spell, to make note of on the spell list?