Let's Read The Immortal Handbook Bestiary

[Aniikinis]

*Reminders of an ancient thread with good advice for this handbook*

Oh gods, I completely forgot about that thread. If I'd remembered about that, I'd have them all statted out by now if I wasn't working on a campaign, a few characters, and working too much. I think I still have my notes somewhere too.

But yeah, I second everything he said and this book would be so much better if they'd stuck with the source material closely and focused on cool factor over most other things.

[danielxcutter]

I'd say the people who wrote Elder Evils did a slightly better job at making world-shaking walking apocalypses, with stuff like the Signs and whatnot.

Slightly.

[ShurikVch]

What issue number is that?

Dragon #289

Think of an Elder Brain, but it spawns these things instead of larval flayers. I think the idea behind this one is they are Space corrupted by Thought or something.

I know what the monster that spawns the Astral Eels is, it's called a Cogent. I was just saying it's poor writing to introduce the monster that spawns from the Cogent first, rather than the other way around.

There it is:


(It reminded me about the "BRAINS!")

[martixy]

Honestly, I don't agree. Epic level PC parties can deliver arbitrarily high numbers in any given category, so numbers are never going to be an interesting challenge.

I agree with the rest of your post a lot and think the threat they pose should be broader and more existential than 'can drop a dice bag's worth of damage on a PC,' but tied to that I think the only road to making them feel different and epic is to make them essentially puzzle encounters. Don't give me an Uber-lich with a billion hit points and five lives. Give me one who can only be harmed by a grandmother who has never known sorrow and let the party work out how to find one, arm her, and recruit her without disqualifying her in the process.

Give me an avatar of conflict who can only be defeated if every sapient being within 100 miles forgives their worst enemy.

Give me a forge-god wielding Swordbreaker who makes every war around him escalate to increase the power of his worshippers and let them figure out that he can only be attacked by someone who is unarmed.

1. You may not agree, but not everyone won't. Large numbers can be an integral part of the power fantasy some players seek. The fact that you can reach arbitrarily high numbers doesn't mean that you should. And while the system is broken because of this, one can agree to NOT break it enough to allow that power fantasy to exist.
2. While you have the right idea - honestly I was gonna say the same thing - epic encounters should turn into what are essentially puzzles, the examples you offered sound just as boring - or worse, obnoxious - than the bags-of-hp of old.
But we can borrow a lot from video games here. Concepts like multi-stage boss-battles, environmental effects, objective-based fights, larger-than-life scales, time pressure, etc.

For example, the lich-with-5-lives isn't that terrible an idea. It's the perfect setup for a multi-stage battle. If you don't fall into the obvious trap of multi-stage battles - just having 5 bars of HP. You make each stage unique - perhaps he has different powers in each stage. And maybe you know of a couple of his phylacteries and can take out one or two, but have to decide what kind of powers(i.e. which stages) you want to face, and none of your choices are good.

Maybe in one of the stages he's a crazy-powerful dracolich, and in another he's not just one creature, but an entire army of undead monstrosities, and you can't disable both before he catches up to you, but can choose which one not to face.
It's a mechanic that gives players additional agency, creates an engaging objective-based race, makes for a compelling baddie.

This is just one example, there's a ton more game design techniques one can employ to make things interesting, you just have to be willing to put some thought into it.

[Lapak]

1. You may not agree, but not everyone won't. Large numbers can be an integral part of the power fantasy some players seek. The fact that you can reach arbitrarily high numbers doesn't mean that you should. And while the system is broken because of this, one can agree to NOT break it enough to allow that power fantasy to exist.

That's an entirely reasonable take! I certainly don't think mine is the One True Fun, I was just putting my thoughts forward in response to yours.

2. While you have the right idea - honestly I was gonna say the same thing - epic encounters should turn into what are essentially puzzles, the examples you offered sound just as boring - or worse, obnoxious - than the bags-of-hp of old.

That's more than fair; when I'm assembling ideas in motion most of them are going to be either borrowed or terrible (or both.) But I think we're in the same place on the overall approach.

[Karl Aegis]

Spoiler: Old Art

Show

[noob]

Give me an avatar of conflict who can only be defeated if every sapient being within 100 miles forgives their worst enemy.

easily defeated: kill all the sapient in the area so hard they stop being sapient.(and also make the avatar stop being sapient or else it counts in the limit)

[Theoboldi]

Since we are on that topic, I will say that it has always been a pet peeve of mine that in many old-school d&d modules (looking at you, Basic D&D immortals) and D&D-inspired media (looking at you, Lone Wolf) there is something of a gameplay shift at high levels.

By which I mean to say that it becomes increasingly difficult to gain permanent victory against enemies you face, and that fighting them off becomes increasingly unfeasable in favor of having to solve puzzles to get rid of them. I can't quite articulate why it bothers me so, though if I tried I would say that it feels somewhat antithetic to the general concept of your character growing stronger as he levels.

It's odd. I'm not exactly opposed to the idea of PCs having to fight smart and utilizing their high level abilies to change overwhelming odds, but the way its done usually is very annoying to me.


On a more relevant note, I think that the sample Amidah's swords deserve a special look. They are a trove of silly madness of their own.

[ColorBlindNinja]

On a more relevant note, I think that the sample Amidah's swords deserve a special look. They are a trove of silly madness of their own.

I might make a bonus post detailing them later.

But for now...




Cherubim, CR 126

(Once again, no picture. It looks like a lion with 6 wings.)

And now we’re getting into the angels in this book. I won’t dwell too long on how they’re organized, but I have to say that the fact that the book has a singular “supreme being” at the top of the hierarchy really clashes with the generally polytheistic D&D pantheon.

With that out of the way, let’s take a look at the first angel in this book, the Cherubim. Apparently, these things once guarded Eden, AKA the upper planes known as Atziluth. Since this is one of the Immortal Handbook’s bizarre cosmological addons, I simply don’t care.

This beast has 345,048 HP, saving throw bonuses in the low hundreds, DR 65 perfect, Regeneration (bypassed by evil artifacts or evil epic spells) and SR 167.

The Cherubim has Shapechange at will as an SLA (caster level 157th!) as well as Astral Projection. Furthermore, it can only be permanently killed by a being of “higher status” than themselves (more divine ranks?) or they just come back to life in 1d10 minutes.

They also enjoy immunity to all non-epic magic and all spells from every school but Evocation, Divination and Universal spells. Again, unless you’re of “higher status” than they are.

And they can nuke everyone within 240 feet of them for 66d100 damage which repeats every round. It offers a reflex save, though, so who cares?

Did I mention they cast as 66th level Clerics with a caster level of 157 and they have 13 epic spells per day? To top it all off, they get an artifact that auto reflects the first two spells cast on it (epic or otherwise).

I know most D&D groups don’t fight angels, but this is a serious case of overkill. I honestly don’t know how you’re intended to kill this thing. Then again, I don’t know what a level 120+ party would look like either so… Let’s move on.

[Karl Aegis]

"A being of higher status" is that thing on the cover. Apparently, Angels can be evil, too. So go ahead and kill the cherubim that are both black and female lions with six wings and a double crown. Also: it looks like if these guys advance enough hit dice they become a different creature. Again, that creature is that guy on the cover.




Look at him, he's cute! But, the evil version is the Balseraph, not just double minority lion wearing a double crown.... Sounds like a One Punch Man villain.

[tyckspoon]

I know most D&D groups don’t fight angels, but this is a serious case of overkill. I honestly don’t know how you’re intended to kill this thing. Then again, I don’t know what a level 120+ party would look like either so… Let’s move on.

I suspect at that point the writer expects the party to be some variety of deific beings themselves; IIRC the Immortal Handbook is supposed to be used alongside other material that presents new rules and a new concept of how really really high levels should work, which means we're missing a lot of context about the kinds of PCs that are meant to contend with these sorts of enemies. Won't guarantee they make any more sense *with* those rules, tho.

[noob]

I might make a bonus post detailing them later.

But for now...




Cherubim, CR 126

(Once again, no picture. It looks like a lion with 6 wings.)

And now we’re getting into the angels in this book. I won’t dwell too long on how they’re organized, but I have to say that the fact that the book has a singular “supreme being” at the top of the hierarchy really clashes with the generally polytheistic D&D pantheon.

With that out of the way, let’s take a look at the first angel in this book, the Cherubim. Apparently, these things once guarded Eden, AKA the upper planes known as Atziluth. Since this is one of the Immortal Handbook’s bizarre cosmological addons, I simply don’t care.

This beast has 345,048 HP, saving throw bonuses in the low hundreds, DR 65 perfect, Regeneration (bypassed by evil artifacts or evil epic spells) and SR 167.

The Cherubim has Shapechange at will as an SLA (caster level 157th!) as well as Astral Projection. Furthermore, it can only be permanently killed by a being of “higher status” than themselves (more divine ranks?) or they just come back to life in 1d10 minutes.

They also enjoy immunity to all non-epic magic and all spells from every school but Evocation, Divination and Universal spells. Again, unless you’re of “higher status” than they are.

And they can nuke everyone within 240 feet of them for 66d100 damage which repeats every round. It offers a reflex save, though, so who cares?

Did I mention they cast as 66th level Clerics with a caster level of 157 and they have 13 epic spells per day? To top it all off, they get an artifact that auto reflects the first two spells cast on it (epic or otherwise).

I know most D&D groups don’t fight angels, but this is a serious case of overkill. I honestly don’t know how you’re intended to kill this thing. Then again, I don’t know what a level 120+ party would look like either so… Let’s move on.

I think it is countered by inflicting so much damage(converted to non lethal) it needs 324243434565434234345464574352 years to come back to consciousness.
Which is done by having more contingent spells than it and thus playing first and thus having all the time you want to make it drop its defenses.

[ColorBlindNinja]

I suspect at that point the writer expects the party to be some variety of deific beings themselves; IIRC the Immortal Handbook is supposed to be used alongside other material that presents new rules and a new concept of how really really high levels should work, which means we're missing a lot of context about the kinds of PCs that are meant to contend with these sorts of enemies. Won't guarantee they make any more sense *with* those rules, tho.

True enough. I may have to review that book next.

I think it is countered by inflicting so much damage(converted to non lethal) it needs 324243434565434234345464574352 years to come back to consciousness.
Which is done by having more contingent spells than it and thus playing first and thus having all the time you want to make it drop its defenses.

I forgot to mention it's got Miracle at will, so it could just use that to emulate Favor of the Martyr and become immune to nonlethal damage.

[noob]

True enough. I may have to review that book next.



I forgot to mention it's got Miracle at will, so it could just use that to emulate Favor of the Martyr and become immune to nonlethal damage.

which is why I mentioned dropping the defenses first.
a bunch of disjunctions would work since spells are not protected by magic immunity.

[ColorBlindNinja]

which is why I mentioned dropping the defenses first.
a bunch of disjunctions would work since spells are not protected by magic immunity.

Disjunction would not work because it's magic immunity would block it.

EDIT: It's immune to Abjuration spells, therefore it cannot be affected by them. Dispelling its buffs counts as being affected.

[noob]

Disjunction would not work because it's magic immunity would block it.

EDIT: It's immune to Abjuration spells, therefore it cannot be affected by them. Dispelling its buffs counts as being affected.

If you start screwing with the definition of being affected the angel get iron heart surged away.
No it is not affected by losing its boost spells or else the angel would automatically protect all the good people from all the offensive spells because it is sad when a good person dies and so it is affected by offensive spells cast on good people.

[ColorBlindNinja]

If you start screwing with the definition of being affected the angel get iron heart surged away.

So what's the duration on the angel?

[noob]

So what's the duration on the angel?

As many rounds as it lives until being iron heart surged away.
Or you can use truename dispell to remove the concept of magic immunity.
Vampire can iron heart surge away their sunlight vulnerability for one round (it is indicated in the errata) so it does not needs a clearly expressed round duration for being iron heart surge-able.
So first you iron heart surge away the limitations iron heart surging then you iron heart surge the angel.

[ColorBlindNinja]

As many rounds as it lives until being iron heart surged away.

No, it needs to have duration. It doesn't have one.

Or you can use truename dispell to remove the concept of magic immunity.

A spell, which it's immune to. And it's immunity appears to be EX.

Vampire can iron heart surge away their sunlight vulnerability for one round (it is indicated in the errata) so it does not needs a clearly expressed round duration.

I found nothing of the sort in the Errata.

Can you provide a link?

[noob]

No, it needs to have duration. It doesn't have one.



A spell, which it's immune to. And it's immunity appears to be EX.




I found nothing of the sort in the Errata.

Can you provide a link?

Well where is the tome of battle errata and did it errata iron heart surge?
as for truename dispell being a spell you are still not casting it on yourself nor on the angel: you cast it on a chicken and use it to rewrite all the rules of the universe since it ends effects.

Again the more widely you interpret effect the worse the game breaks down.

[ColorBlindNinja]

Well where is the tome of battle errata

It should be here.

and did it errata iron heart surge?

Not according to my copy.

as for truename dispell being a spell you are still not casting it on yourself nor on the angel: you cast it on a chicken and use it to rewrite all the rules of the universe since it ends effects.

It only works on spells, the angel's immunity is not a spell.

EDIT: It only works on one spell at a time and that chicken won't last long.

[noob]

It should be here.



Not according to my copy.




It only works on spells, the angel's immunity is not a spell.

due to odd formulation it does not works only on spells: it works against any effect.

By speaking aloud the personal truename of your foe and pointing with arm outstretched, you cause a gray haze to swirl around your target briefly.
Then the haze dissipates, carrying your enemy's magic with it.
This spell enables you to see the strands of magic surrounding your target and selectively separate them.
This functions like the dispel magic spell, except that it always targets a creature, you learn the nature of each ongoing magical effect currently affecting the target creature, and effects you want to dispel are automatically removed (no caster level check is necessary), if you succeed on the Truespeak check, you can choose which effects you want to dispel.
Thus, you can eliminate harmful effects while retaining beneficial ones—or vice versa.

Read: it says AND effects you want to dispel are automatically removed.
something does not needs to be dispellable for me to want to dispel it and it removes what I want to dispel.
so if alcohol was effecting me and that I wanted to dispel it then it would be removed even If I did cast truename dispel on a goat.
So it makes me know the magical effect on the creature AND it does the effect of removing all the effects I want to dispel but nowhere does it says the effects have to be a subset of the detected effects.

It is a well known quirk of truename dispel.

[Quarian Rex]

I agree with the rest of your post a lot and think the threat they pose should be broader and more existential than 'can drop a dice bag's worth of damage on a PC,' but tied to that I think the only road to making them feel different and epic is to make them essentially puzzle encounters. Don't give me an Uber-lich with a billion hit points and five lives. Give me one who can only be harmed by a grandmother who has never known sorrow and let the party work out how to find one, arm her, and recruit her without disqualifying her in the process.

Give me an avatar of conflict who can only be defeated if every sapient being within 100 miles forgives their worst enemy.

Give me a forge-god wielding Swordbreaker who makes every war around him escalate to increase the power of his worshippers and let them figure out that he can only be attacked by someone who is unarmed.

I get the sentiment but most ideas like this wind up being pure cancer for the campaign. Weaponizing a grandmother who has never known sorrow comes down to a session(s) of mother-may-I with the DM (there are virtually no mechanics in the game that would let you find such a thing so you will only find her when the DM gets bored and decides to progress the campaign) to let the final encounter be handled by an NPC. I can't imagine anything more unsatisfying.

Having every sapient being within 100 miles forgive their worst enemy? Sounds like the actual puzzle is how to murder every sapient being within 100 miles to de-power an Avatar. And this, like the idea above, would probably only happen after an initial encounter with a creature who is completely unbeatable solely due to DM fiat, possibly resulting in an near TPK. The idea of having to amateur Dr. Phil every disgruntled butcher or century long blood-feud (Hatfield/McCoy) would be excruciating. The idea that true forgiveness could be found from a single conversation or through threat would show such a supreme lack of understanding of basic human nature that it would just take me completely out of the game. People don't show up to play heroic fantasy to get their teeth kicked in without any hope of defense and then be forced to roleplay daytime talk tv.

The forge-god wielding Swordbreaker who can only be attacked by someone who is unarmed is actually a good idea, conditional immunity penetrated by something in-obvious but easily at hand. Whether or not this actually works depends solely on whether the PCs are actually given a heads-up, like the god or nearby followers talking up a storm about how the forge-god can never be defeated because all weapons are His gifts, etc.

But we can borrow a lot from video games here. Concepts like multi-stage boss-battles, environmental effects, objective-based fights, larger-than-life scales, time pressure, etc.

For example, the lich-with-5-lives isn't that terrible an idea. It's the perfect setup for a multi-stage battle. If you don't fall into the obvious trap of multi-stage battles - just having 5 bars of HP. You make each stage unique - perhaps he has different powers in each stage. And maybe you know of a couple of his phylacteries and can take out one or two, but have to decide what kind of powers(i.e. which stages) you want to face, and none of your choices are good.

Maybe in one of the stages he's a crazy-powerful dracolich, and in another he's not just one creature, but an entire army of undead monstrosities, and you can't disable both before he catches up to you, but can choose which one not to face.
It's a mechanic that gives players additional agency, creates an engaging objective-based race, makes for a compelling baddie.

This is just one example, there's a ton more game design techniques one can employ to make things interesting, you just have to be willing to put some thought into it.

This sort of thing is way better. Interesting and potent, yet still rewarding player preparation and planning, and giving the players some choice and agency. That their choice is merely to choose the flavor of their poison is fine, it is a meaningful choice nonetheless.

I think that the biggest factor in this kind of thing is to make an interesting encounter for both the DM and the players. An encounter that completely trivializes/negates all player abilities until the party has retrieved a MacGuffin is the opposite of both.

I'm not trying to be overly critical of Lapak (or anyone else, I am quite aware that the examples were thrown out on the spot and such) but I do think that suggestions like this should be explored a bit to see why they may or may not work. Some of these things may actually work in a more narrative form (like a book) but are almost impossible in an actual game (the players don't have the level of world knowledge of their characters so intuitive leaps by book protagonists would have to be spoon-fed info from the DM, something far less satisfying, and even then the players may demand an explanation for bits that make little/no sense).

[ColorBlindNinja]

due to odd formulation it does not works only on spells: it works against any effect.

Read: it says AND effects you want to dispel are automatically removed.
something does not needs to be dispellable for me to want to dispel it and it removes what I want to dispel.
so if alcohol was effecting me and that I wanted to dispel it then it would be removed even If I did cast truename dispel on a goat.
So it makes me know the magical effect on the creature AND it does the effect of removing all the effects I want to dispel but nowhere does it says the effects have to be a subset of the detected effects.

It is a well known quirk of truename dispel.

It won't work because Truename Dispel is a spell. Which the angel is immune to.

EDIT: You have to target the angel to get it to work. Perhaps you've confused Truename Dispel with Spell Rebirth?

EDIT: 2 Or are you trying to claim that the Angel's magic immunity is "affecting" the chicken?

[Lapak]

It won't work because Truename Dispel is a spell. Which the angel is immune to.

EDIT: You have to target the angel to get it to work. Perhaps you've confused Truename Dispel with Spell Rebirth?

EDIT: 2 Or are you trying to claim that the Angel's magic immunity is "affecting" the chicken?

Neither. He is claiming the spell is so loosely written that the effects you end don't have to be effects that have anything to do with the targets. It's an even more generous reading than people who think you can put out the sun with IHS.

[ColorBlindNinja]

Neither. He is claiming the spell is so loosely written that the effects you end don't have to be effects that have anything to do with the targets. It's an even more generous reading than people who think you can put out the sun with IHS.

Agreed, and I don't think the spell works like that.

[Lleban]

Don't....don't tell me the angels get worse than this.

[ColorBlindNinja]

Don't....don't tell me the angels get worse than this.

Okay, I won't.

[Karl Aegis]

Technically, if we're using the rules from Ascension, there should be two MacGuffins in the entire universe able to destroy a cherubim permanently without resorting to smacking it with a balseraph.

[ColorBlindNinja]

Technically, if we're using the rules from Ascension, there should be two MacGuffins in the entire universe able to destroy a cherubim permanently without resorting to smacking it with a balseraph.

Which basically means if the DM doesn't give you one, you're screwed.