So, with War of Souls, and Heroes of a New Age, I've had some catching up. I've purchased both the DLCS and the Age of Mortals book, and have to say, overall, pretty good stuff
However, I've noticed some niggling problems in Age of Mortals.
Great spells, great prestige classes, and I'm going through the spells now. Looks like some interesting monsters and templates at the back, and lots of geography information.
However.
Given that I've already read the War of Souls trilogy, why do I need to read basically the same compressed summary of the War of Souls trilogy like 4-5 times before I'm halfway through the book? It just seems like there's a lot of repetition or padding going on.
I want this to be constructive though....it's an observation. There's a lot of good stuff in the book....I'm just curious about this aspect. I mean, the intro talks about it, then it's described again in the race section, and then twice in the magic section. It's kind of like "I get the point, get on with it".
The Ogre Titan template is really cool....though it doesn't specify whether it increases the ogre's size to Large or not. I'm also curious....it seems that the Ogre Titans of SAGA/2nd Ed. were powerful spellcasters, but they don't seem to be in 3E. Any reason for that?
Banshee
They can be powerful spellcasters in 3rd edition ...
1) they get a huge boost to Intelligence and Charisma and a respectable boost to Wisdom
2) their necromantic talent ability makes them butch necromancers (as though they had greater spell focus[necromancy]).
3) the magic missile-like Soul Blast
4) Stone and Steel Shaping - at will
5) Favored class: Sorcerer
It's true they don't get any inherent spellcasting, but once the titan adds spellcasting levels, he'll be quite formidable. Of course, there's the whole massive level adjustment thing, but that's an entirely different issue.
As for the topic at hand, the War of Souls stuff doesn't bother me. The only subject I've got an issue with is the lack of a campaign map.
Originally posted by iltharanos
Ogres are already Large-sized. The low end, too. The DMG puts creatures of Large size as between 8 ft. and 16 ft. tall. Ogre Titans are 15 ft. tall. So the ogres merely move from the small end of Large size to the Large end. Now if one were a Dragonlance half-ogre or minotaur (both of whom are medium size), then presumably it'd make you Large size. Maybe. It'd be anyone's guess, since only Ogre and Ogre Magi have undergone the Titan transformation.
Minotaur and half-ogre titans would be shorter than other ogre titans. The template doesn't alter the base creature's size category, assuming (as you stated) that most ogres are already large.
Note that the template should change the base creature's type to "Giant", not "Monstrous Humanoid (Ogre)". I would also include hags in the category of creatures to which this template can be applied, as they are considered an ogre sub-race in Dragonlance (greenhags, annis and sea hags).
Cheers,
Cam
I would think that "monstrous humanoid (Ogre)" would be more fitting than "giant" for Krynn, causing a reclassification of some of the monsters (which will most likely be addressed in the bestiary).
Its a small point, but at times (bane weapons, favored enemies, etc.) monster classifcation becomes important.
Originally posted by Craven Moistmuffins
Would Krynn ogres really be considered giants? I don't actually remember reading anything about giant races at all, come to think of it. (They would have been great shock troops for any of the recent wars.) If there are giants somewhere, they would be Greygem offshoots of ogres, not the other way around.
I would think that "monstrous humanoid (Ogre)" would be more fitting than "giant" for Krynn, causing a reclassification of some of the monsters (which will most likely be addressed in the bestiary).
Its a small point, but at times (bane weapons, favored enemies, etc.) monster classifcation becomes important.
They're still members of the Giant creature type, which for the most part is a function of game mechanics and not something you'd refer to in-character. Trolls, ettins etc are similarly Giants. Hill giants exist on Krynn, too, although they're really just enormous ogre offshoots as you say.
If one were really so inclined, one could switch out "Ogre" as a creature type instead of "Giant" and leave it at that.
Cheers,
Cam
dump "giant" and add "monstrous humanoid (ogre.)"
place under "ogre" ogres, minotaurs, irda, half-ogres, etc. all the offshoots...basically reclassify to fit the style and feel of Dragonlance.
And, could you tell me where you saw a hill giant? I might have missed something, but I don't remember seeing one appear in any of the "canon" books. (By "canon" I am excluding the stuff that Weis and Hickman referred to as tales that may or may not be true in the Second Generation prologue.)
But if it is in there, point it out, because that is something I was wondering about. Giants would be influential, as many of them have the power to stand up to dragons.
Originally posted by Craven Moistmuffins
Um...that's exactly what I was getting at...
dump "giant" and add "monstrous humanoid (ogre.)"
place under "ogre" ogres, minotaurs, irda, half-ogres, etc. all the offshoots...basically reclassify to fit the style and feel of Dragonlance.
Monstrous humanoids don't have subtypes the way humanoids do. It would make more sense to simply call it "Ogre", since the Giant subtype is different from the Monstrous Humanoid one.
And, could you tell me where you saw a hill giant? I might have missed something, but I don't remember seeing one appear in any of the "canon" books. (By "canon" I am excluding the stuff that Weis and Hickman referred to as tales that may or may not be true in the Second Generation prologue.)
But if it is in there, point it out, because that is something I was wondering about. Giants would be influential, as many of them have the power to stand up to dragons.
Hill giants are a canonical monster as they've appeared in the original modules and were also included in the monster list in the SAGA 5th Age materials. Frost, fire, stone and cloud giants are not as canonical, and would be unique aberrant specimens of ogre if they were to show up in a campaign.
There are a lot of monsters in the Dragonlance campaign that you won't have ever seen in the novels. That doesn't rule them out.
Cheers,
Cam
Random note: anyone else notice that Irda cant shape shift to look like an Ogre? Thats messed up. I would most definatly change the giant type to Humanoid (ogre) for dragonlance.
Heck, most templates that can apply to humanoids also stipulate that they can apply to giants too, its not that big of a stretch.
(hint: thats me asking you people to put it in the bestiary to make it offical and stuff) =)
Originally posted by Halabis
Heck, most templates that can apply to humanoids also stipulate that they can apply to giants too, its not that big of a stretch.
(hint: thats me asking you people to put it in the bestiary to make it offical and stuff) =)
The three creature types (humanoid, monstrous humanoid, and giant) may seem superficially similar but they each have distinct qualities which apply to the creature in question. You cannot simply switch them out in name only, as they have slightly different rules. Here's what they all have in common:
—8-sided Hit Dice, or by character class.
—Skill points equal to (2 + Int modifier, minimum 1) per Hit Die, with quadruple skill points for the first Hit Die, or by character class.
—They all breathe, eat, and sleep.
A humanoid usually has two arms, two legs, and one head, or a humanlike torso, arms, and a head. Humanoids have few or no supernatural or extraordinary abilities, but most can speak and usually have well-developed societies. They usually are Small or Medium. Every humanoid creature also has a subtype.
Humanoids with 1 Hit Die exchange the features of their humanoid Hit Die for the class features of a PC or NPC class. Humanoids of this sort are presented as 1st-level warriors, which means that they have average combat ability and poor saving throws.
Humanoids with more than 1 Hit Die are the only humanoids who make use of the features of the humanoid type.
—Base attack bonus equal to 3/4 total Hit Dice (as cleric).
—Good Reflex saves (usually; a humanoid’s good save varies).
—Proficient with all simple weapons, or by character class.
—Proficient with whatever type of armor (light, medium, or heavy) it is described as wearing, or by character class. If a humanoid does not have a class and wears armor, it is proficient with that type of armor and all lighter types. Humanoids not indicated as wearing armor are not proficient with armor. Humanoids are proficient with shields if they are proficient with any form of armor.
A giant is a humanoid-shaped creature of great strength, usually of at least Large size.
—Base attack bonus equal to 3/4 total Hit Dice (as cleric).
—Good Fortitude saves.
—Low-light vision.
—Proficient with all simple and martial weapons, as well as any natural weapons.
—Proficient with whatever type of armor (light, medium or heavy) it is described as wearing, as well as all lighter types. Giants not described as wearing armor are not proficient with armor. Giants are proficient with shields if they are proficient with any form of armor.
Monstrous humanoids are similar to humanoids, but with monstrous or animalistic features. They often have magical abilities as well.
—Base attack bonus equal to total Hit Dice (as fighter).
—Good Reflex and Will saves.
—Darkvision out to 60 feet.
—Proficient with all simple weapons and any weapons mentioned in its entry.
—Proficient with whatever type of armor (light, medium, or heavy) it is described as wearing, as well as all lighter types. Monstrous humanoids not indicated as wearing armor are not proficient with armor. Monstrous humanoids are proficient with shields if they are proficient with any form of armor.
(All of the above was taken from the System Reference Document at http://www.wizards.com/D20/article.asp?x=srd35 and does not represent a reprinting of copyright material for the purposes of this forum.)
So you see, we could rename "Giant" and call it "Ogre", but we should NOT change all ogres and ogre titans etc to a different creature type.
Cheers,
Cam
I think all those in favor of changing Ogres to humanoid(ogre) just got smashed by Cam's super powers...
Originally posted by Daedavias
*psst*
I think all those in favor of changing Ogres to humanoid(ogre) just got smashed by Cam's super powers...
Just be glad that Cam uses his powers for good, rather than evil!
Originally posted by Halabis
Random note: anyone else notice that Irda cant shape shift to look like an Ogre? Thats messed up. I would most definatly change the giant type to Humanoid (ogre) for dragonlance.
Ok.....quick now, I just want to point out the reason why they cant. Because Irda are ogres......they are the original ogres. They renamed themselves Irda after they rebelled against ogre society. The ugly ogres that you are used to only look the way they do because of the degeneration that the ogre race has gone through down the centuries. So......an Irda cannot shapeshift into an ogre because they are an ogre. Its just that the typical ogre in the present day is a degenerated version of the Irda. On a side note here.....perhaps the Ogre Magi is not as degenerated as typical ogres and that is why Ogre magi have their magical skillz.
No one is smashed here. Especially not us that are sharing ideas and discussing ways to make the game better. Quoting the rule as it stands is in no way an argument against changing it.
That's like someone suggesting "the longsword should do 1d10"
and then someone else saying.."That's stupid, because a longsword does 1d8."
The suggestion was for a world-specific reclassification, not a simple name change that uses the exact same criteria.
Just changing the name to "ogre" from "giant" would leave out many creatures that are Greygem offshoots of the ogre. An Irda and an Ogre are vastly different, but originally the same creature, so some type of subclassification that takes both factors into account would be great.
One big example. The minotaur is a Monstrous Humanoid (minotaur), and is listed as as an ogre under the Titan. The Titan also said that the creature's type changes from what it is to, "Monstrous Humanoid (Ogre)."
So, a good compromise might be to make ogre a subtype. An ogre or hill giant could be Giant (ogre), and so on. Could work...maybe....
What you did, rather than think it out, is quote the basic rules to disagree with world-specific rules, in which subclasses for "monstrous humanoid" do, in fact, exist.
The other point...it is true that a creature does not have to appear in a novel to exist. (By the same token, the fact that every humanoid has a subtype does not preclude other creatures from having a subtype. In fact, most monsters do.) I never said something appearing in a novel decides its existence. But it is also true, that a powerful, influential creature (that could have greatly impacted what has been written) should not appear out of nowhere, and then get the lame explanation, "they were here all along, we just never wrote about them."
The simple, polite answer would have been, "they were in the original modules."
Then I could have looked and said, "yes, you were right."
Originally posted by Craven Moistmuffins
The simple, polite answer would have been, "they were in the original modules."
Right. Which is what I said in my post prior to Halabis'.
I understand your point, too, in that minotaurs and many other creatures have their origin in the pre-Graygem ogres. However, those creatures are no longer true ogres. Irda, for example, are humanoids with the shapeshifter type now, not giants.
In situations where the origin of the creature is in question, such as with the ogre titan template, it's simple enough to just list out the affected creatures. A minotaur is not affected by a weapon designed to slay ogres, for example, so giving it an ogre subtype wouldn't quite work.
Cheers,
Cam