Class and Level Geekery XIII - Comic As Written, not Comic As Intended

[D.One]

[...] one of the core principles of this thread is that we take the comic at its word until proven otherwise. Saying "but maybe when the comic says Superb Dispelling it doesn't mean the version printed" goes against that. Until we have actual evidence, not just speculation, that the comic and SRD spells are different, they should be assumed to be the same because that's what taking the comic at its word implies.

Agreed. After all:

Q: Is a character's statement about another character considered evidence?
Yes. We assume that when a character says something about another character's (or his own) ability scores, build, feats, and so forth, they are speaking the truth, except where this contradicts with other evidence or is clearly not possible within the rules.

That's the basic assumption here, IMHO. The comic says the truth, unless we have a strong reason to think otherwise. (Not a speculation like "What if it wasn't?")

[Chronos]

As I understand it, all level 0-9 wizard spells are custom spells, in the sense that some wizard, somewhen, developed it from scratch. Sometimes, this is recognized in being named after a particular wizard, like Mordenkainen or Bigby. In other cases, like Fireball, the original discoverer is so far back in history that her name has been lost.

But the difference is, with all of those spells, once they're discovered by one caster, they can be easily transferred to other wizards. If a wizard wants a 3rd-level blasty fiery spell, she can research her own, which could have absolutely any parameters, or she can borrow another wizard's spellbook and just copy down Fireball, and get a Fireball exactly like everyone else's. And the latter is much easier, so that's what most wizards do.

This is not true with epic spells. If someone else already has an epic dispelling spell, and you want one, too, you can't just borrow it from their spellbook. You have to research it from scratch yourself, and since you're doing so, there's no reason to assume that it's going to come out exactly the same as that other wizard's. Even if you're trying for basically the same thing, it's probably going to come out different in some way, and you're probably not trying for exactly the same thing in the first place. Even if Xykon wanted something with a higher level cap on the dispel check, and wanted backlash damage as a mitigating factor, he'd be foolish to choose the same amounts of both as in the sample. I don't think anyone thinks Xykon is anywhere near level 40, so why would he make that the cap? He might make the cap two or three levels higher than his level, so it'll continue to scale as he levels up, but 7 or 13 or 19 levels higher? Why would he do that? And having set that value at wherever he wants, he'd then choose the amount of backlash damage based on what his Spellcraft modifier is and just how much mitigation he'd need.

[Quild]

The only information that we would have by stating that Xykon's Superb Dispelling is the SRD one is that Xykon is reckless enough to use a dispell that does important backlash damage while overkilling the required DC.

It wouldn't tell us anything about his level since we would have to make other asumptions in order to suppose a minimum level of Xykon. The asumption that he has no item that helps him to craft is quite a stretch.

So I don't see how it matters for now who's wrong or right.

[Quartz]

This is not true with epic spells. If someone else already has an epic dispelling spell, and you want one, too, you can't just borrow it from their spellbook. You have to research it from scratch yourself.

The first part is correct; the latter not. Epic spells can be scribed into stone or similar material and copied from there. See ELH p91.

Epic spells inscribed on stone tablets were usually developed by spellcasters deep in the mists of history, although a new epic spell could also be developed this way if the creator is willing to share the discovery. Epic spells may only be inscribed on stone tablets or other substances of equal or greater hardness. Once a spell is so inscribed another epic spellcaster can learn it without going through the process of development. Once an inscribed epic spell is learned by another epic spellcaster in this fashion, the tablet upon which it is inscribed is destroyed and cannot be mended.

[Peelee]

As I understand it, all level 0-9 wizard spells are custom spells, in the sense that some wizard, somewhen, developed it from scratch. Sometimes, this is recognized in being named after a particular wizard, like Mordenkainen or Bigby. In other cases, like Fireball, the original discoverer is so far back in history that her name has been lost.

Eh, I'd argue that wizard spells not named for a specific wizard originated as sorcerer spells and wizards researched how to cast it for themselves. They'd exist without any wizardic intervention, and thus were never custom spells.

This argument stems from my desire to keep things simple.

[b_jonas]

Surely at least in OotS epic spells can somehow be learnt, because Xykon could learn the Cloister epic spell that Dorukan has researched.

[Boost]

RE: Everyone who says Epic spells must be original creations instead of being copied directly from the spells in the ELH:

How do you explain monsters with Epic Spell-like Abilities?

If monsters can have Epic Mage Armor or Superb Dispelling as an innate ability, and it functions exactly the same as the spell listed in the book, then there IS a "standard" form of that spell in existence, just like there's a standard form of Fireball.

[rodneyAnonymous]

How do you explain monsters with Epic Spell-like Abilities?

I'm not sure there is such a thing.

[Douglas]

I'm not sure there is such a thing.

See Dream Larva, Phane, Xixecal, Hunefer, Uvuudaum, and Vemiurge.

[rodneyAnonymous]

Ok. What I am saying, though, is that even if the development details are copied from the ELH, an epic spell is a unique creation in that universe.

[Quild]

This one is quite a stretch but...

Golem slam attacks makes 2d8+5 damages which is an average of 14 damages.
Haley has 5 wounds in #977 (coming from slam attacks I guess 1 wound = 1 hit)

If Haley has 9-11 CON, that makes an average of 56.5 HP for average damage of 70 damages. Add the damages of the thrown lightning gun, the jump attack and the other slam attack, it starts to make a lot.

Of course, Haley can have more HP than her average, Crystal could have less STR than a classic Flesh Golem and could have dealt less damages than her average. And we may know if Haley is in negative HP in next strip (but O'Chul was more incapacitated than that when in negative HP).

BUT, wouldn't we be safe to assume a 12+ CON for Haley?

In addition of this, we know she has 12+ INT and CHA, would CON be her dump stat?

(I also wonder if being "curvy" wouldn't be an indicator of some CON)

[KillingAScarab]

Haley's magical flight is still active in #978. I was going to ask if anyone thought this effect was active for long enough to be overland flight, but I just realized overland flight cannot be put on a wand. Haley's wand used in #975 seems likely to have been a wand of fly.

[Crusher]

This one is quite a stretch but...

Golem slam attacks makes 2d8+5 damages which is an average of 14 damages.
Haley has 5 wounds in #977 (coming from slam attacks I guess 1 wound = 1 hit)

If Haley has 9-11 CON, that makes an average of 56.5 HP for average damage of 70 damages. Add the damages of the thrown lightning gun, the jump attack and the other slam attack, it starts to make a lot.

Of course, Haley can have more HP than her average, Crystal could have less STR than a classic Flesh Golem and could have dealt less damages than her average. And we may know if Haley is in negative HP in next strip (but O'Chul was more incapacitated than that when in negative HP).

BUT, wouldn't we be safe to assume a 12+ CON for Haley?

In addition of this, we know she has 12+ INT and CHA, would CON be her dump stat?

(I also wonder if being "curvy" wouldn't be an indicator of some CON)

You can't use averages for determining stats. You have to min-max it, assuming minimum or maximum possible rolls by everyone in the situation (Haley rolling straight 1s for HP and Crystal rolling maximum, or vice-versa). Otherwise we can't set a floor or a ceiling because we don't know that someone hasn't just gotten extremely lucky/unlucky. And even then we'd have to check out Haley's art to look for signs of off-panel healing.

[D.One]

This one is quite a stretch but...

Golem slam attacks makes 2d8+5 damages which is an average of 14 damages.
Haley has 5 wounds in #977 (coming from slam attacks I guess 1 wound = 1 hit)

If Haley has 9-11 CON, that makes an average of 56.5 HP for average damage of 70 damages. Add the damages of the thrown lightning gun, the jump attack and the other slam attack, it starts to make a lot.

Of course, Haley can have more HP than her average, Crystal could have less STR than a classic Flesh Golem and could have dealt less damages than her average. And we may know if Haley is in negative HP in next strip (but O'Chul was more incapacitated than that when in negative HP).

BUT, wouldn't we be safe to assume a 12+ CON for Haley?

In addition of this, we know she has 12+ INT and CHA, would CON be her dump stat?

(I also wonder if being "curvy" wouldn't be an indicator of some CON)

The other problem I see with this analysis is that we know the Crystal Golem isn't a standard one, so we can't be sure her damage is 2d8+5. As Bozzok said:

No reason to wash all those murder skills down the drain [...]

[Loreweaver15]

What possible reason could someone, especially an author like Rich, have for taking the name of an example spell and sticking it on his own custom spell?

Let's not forget that Rich crafted his own version of Mass Death Ward because he forgot the real one existed.

[Gilphon]

The detail of it causing some backlash damage makes me think that's an unlikely scenario here, especially considering the comic didn't really call any attention to it. It kind of speaks to Rich saying 'and then Xykon would take some backlash because that's how Superb Dispelling work', y'know?

[Crusher]

The detail of it causing some backlash damage makes me think that's an unlikely scenario here, especially considering the comic didn't really call any attention to it. It kind of speaks to Rich saying 'and then Xykon would take some backlash because that's how Superb Dispelling work', y'know?

Except didn't someone note that Xykon *did* appear to have taken damage from casting it?

[Douglas]

Except didn't someone note that Xykon *did* appear to have taken damage from casting it?

I think that was exactly his point - that the backlash damage is an indication of matching the SRD version, and thus Rich having forgotten about the SRD one and made up his own is unlikely.

Let's not forget that Rich crafted his own version of Mass Death Ward because he forgot the real one existed.

Yes, but that's a really simple alteration of a spell he did remember with a standard template for the new name, and had a big deal made of it in the comic. Superb Dispelling has a sufficiently unique name that it's unlikely to have been picked for a custom spell by accident, and no mention of custom research was made at all. It was just "Xykon's an epic spellcaster, and he cast this epic spell, which I consider merely mentioning the name to be sufficient explanation of it". If it were a customized version I'd expect at least something analogous to the one-liner about "Xykon's Moderately Escapable Forcecage".

Also, I think we assumed that it was the Spell Compendium version until Rich explicitly stated otherwise, so if anything that example is a point on the "assume the SRD version" side.

[ti'esar]

The detail of it causing some backlash damage makes me think that's an unlikely scenario here, especially considering the comic didn't really call any attention to it. It kind of speaks to Rich saying 'and then Xykon would take some backlash because that's how Superb Dispelling work', y'know?

While determining authorial intent isn't usually something that works out for this thread, I'm inclined to agree with this point because of the highlighted part. The way Superb Dispelling seems to be portrayed pretty true to the SRD, while not having much attention drawn to that - or it in general; a non-D&D-playing reader probably wouldn't even recognize it as an epic spell - suggests that in this case, the Giant probably can be safely concluded to have meant it as the SRD version.

[D.One]

The way Superb Dispelling seems to be portrayed pretty true to the SRD, while not having much attention drawn to that - or it in general; a non-D&D-playing reader probably wouldn't even recognize it as an epic spell - suggests that in this case, the Giant probably can be safely concluded to have meant it as the SRD version.

Agreed. I mean, it exists within SRD, with the same name and (for all we've seen) effect. I see no reason to speculate it's not the SRD version unless we have any minimal indication of it.

[Rakoa]

Agreed. I mean, it exists within SRD, with the same name and (for all we've seen) effect. I see no reason to speculate it's not the SRD version unless we have any minimal indication of it.

And from what we've seen, there is none. I'm all for including it.

[Gilphon]

To argue against myself here, I think that while the authorial intent probably is that was the SRD version, I'm not sure if that's strong enough evidence for our purposes.

To touch on a different topic- somebody suggested using the fact that Haley was able to receive a sending in 893 to derive an upper bound for Xykon's level, as Cloister had worn off on her.

I thought that was worth pursuing, so I checked This timeline post, and, well...

The good news is that Cloister's duration does give us an upper bound. The bad news is that that upper bound is 49.

So, I mean, I doubt anyone thought differently, but we can be certain that X's level is below 50.

[D.One]

So, I mean, I doubt anyone thought differently, but we can be certain that X's level is below 50.

Roy and the others are probably relieved after knowing that. :-)

Does anybody have succeded in getting close to what Cloister would be in game terms? This way we could try to nail it closer.

[Douglas]

To argue against myself here, I think that while the authorial intent probably is that was the SRD version, I'm not sure if that's strong enough evidence for our purposes.

I think that's arguing from the wrong base premise. The default should be "the name matches, we take the comic at its word, therefore it's the official version". Authorial intent would have to go against that to generate justified debate. Authorial intent appearing to match elevates it to "why are we even talking about this?" territory.

Does anybody have succeded in getting close to what Cloister would be in game terms? This way we could try to nail it closer.

There are too many ad hoc factors involved for an estimate with any reasonable degree of confidence.

[Crusher]

I think that was exactly his point - that the backlash damage is an indication of matching the SRD version, and thus Rich having forgotten about the SRD one and made up his own is unlikely.

Oh, so it was. I misread his point.

[Gilphon]

Well, I mean, the reason people are hesitant to accept this point is that to be able to cast the SRD version, he'd have to be level 27+ plus. Which, while not impossible, is a bit of a strong assumption- and the authorial intent would appear run against it, what with stuff him like him estimating Roy to be 8+ levels below him.

Estimating authorial intent would, on the whole, suggest that Rich fudged the spellcasting DC on Superb Dispelling, or just didn't bother to look it up, so that Xykon could use it. But since 'Rich broke the rules' is definitely not a premise we accept without evidence, we have to look beyond that. And since 'it's a different version of Superb Dispelling' is not breaking the rules and appears to be close to authorial intent, it's an attractive prospect.

[ti'esar]

Well, I mean, the reason people are hesitant to accept this point is that to be able to cast the SRD version, he'd have to be level 27+ plus. Which, while not impossible, is a bit of a strong assumption- and the authorial intent would appear run against it, what with stuff him like him estimating Roy to be 8+ levels below him.

I think there's strong, if circumstantial, evidence that Xykon's level has been revised upward a couple of times over the course of the comic. In DCF I don't think he was even meant to be epic, for instance.

[illyahr]

Well, I mean, the reason people are hesitant to accept this point is that to be able to cast the SRD version, he'd have to be level 27+ plus. Which, while not impossible, is a bit of a strong assumption- and the authorial intent would appear run against it, what with stuff him like him estimating Roy to be 8+ levels below him.

You do realize that if Xykon was 27 and Roy was level 9, that is greater than 8 levels difference (8+), right?

[Rakoa]

You do realize that if Xykon was 27 and Roy was level 9, that is greater than 8 levels difference (8+), right?

I think what he means is that Xykon could have made a much closer estimate. Which I frankly doubt. Xykon can't remember the man's name; I don't expect him to accurately be able to assess his abilities in a comparative analysis.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I think what he means is that Xykon could have made a much closer estimate. Which I frankly doubt. Xykon can't remember the man's name; I don't expect him to accurately be able to assess his abilities in a comparative analysis.

Xykon might not be very good at this "socialising with the enemy" business, but he is good at a few things, one of which is power. He may not be able to recall which of the dozens of adventurers he has faced Roy happens to be, but I'm fairly certain he can accurately determine rather quickly how dangerous his opponent is.

GW