Author Topic: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life  (Read 119117 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

McPoyo

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3783
    • Email
Re: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life
« Reply #60 on: October 23, 2009, 02:06:02 PM »
Yeah, that's different than asking for how long it takes to get a 50% chance to have gotten the template the first time (aka, once).
[Spoiler]
A gygaxian dungeon is like the world's most messed up game show.

Behind door number one: INSTANT DEATH!
Behind door number 2: A magic crown!
Behind door number 3: 4d6 giant bees, and THREE HUNDRED POUNDS OF HONEY!
They don't/haven't, was the point. 3.5 is as dead as people not liking nice tits.

Sometimes, their tits (3.5) get enhancements (houserules), but that doesn't mean people don't like nice tits.

Though sometimes, the surgeon (DM) botches them pretty bad...
Best metaphor I have seen in a long time.  I give you much fu.
Three Errata for the Mage-kings under the sky,
Seven for the Barbarian-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal Monks doomed to die,
One for the Wizard on his dark throne
In the Land of Charop where the Shadows lie.
[/spoiler]

Bauglir

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2346
  • TriOptimum
Re: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life
« Reply #61 on: October 23, 2009, 05:57:16 PM »
Although, if the example is the RAI, then we're doing it wrong. But we all know how good WotC is at writing up their examples. If the example is correct, then it'd better be worded as, "An undead has a 1% chance of gaining this template when it reaches 100 years of age. An undead's chance of gaining this template is 1% higher for every previous time it has gained this template, and it gets a chance to gain the template every 100 years after its first chance, regardless of whether or not it gained it on the previous occasion."
So you end up stuck in an endless loop, unable to act, forever.

In retrospect, much like Keanu Reeves.

McPoyo

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3783
    • Email
Re: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life
« Reply #62 on: October 23, 2009, 06:05:37 PM »
Or simply adding a line similar to "every time this template is gained, reset the starting percentage to the number of times the template is possessed" or the like.
[Spoiler]
A gygaxian dungeon is like the world's most messed up game show.

Behind door number one: INSTANT DEATH!
Behind door number 2: A magic crown!
Behind door number 3: 4d6 giant bees, and THREE HUNDRED POUNDS OF HONEY!
They don't/haven't, was the point. 3.5 is as dead as people not liking nice tits.

Sometimes, their tits (3.5) get enhancements (houserules), but that doesn't mean people don't like nice tits.

Though sometimes, the surgeon (DM) botches them pretty bad...
Best metaphor I have seen in a long time.  I give you much fu.
Three Errata for the Mage-kings under the sky,
Seven for the Barbarian-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal Monks doomed to die,
One for the Wizard on his dark throne
In the Land of Charop where the Shadows lie.
[/spoiler]

snakeman830

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3494
  • BG's resident furry min/maxxer
Re: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life
« Reply #63 on: October 24, 2009, 12:02:51 AM »
Although, if the example is the RAI, then we're doing it wrong. But we all know how good WotC is at writing up their examples.
You mean like the dozens of "example Prestige Class members" that don't qualify for the prestige class?  Or the Psychic Warrior starting package (they can't take Weapon Focus at level 1)?  Or...

Yeah...
I am constantly amazed by how many DM's ban Tomb of Battle.  The book doesn't even exist!

Quotes:[spoiler]
By yes, she means no.
That explains so much about my life.
hiicantcomeupwithacharacterthatisntaghostwhyisthatamijustretardedorsomething
Why would you even do this? It hurts my eyes and looks like you ate your keyboard before suffering an attack of explosive diarrhea.
[/spoiler]

If using Genesis to hide your phylactry, set it at -300 degrees farenheit.  See how do-gooders fare with a liquid atmosphere.

bayar

  • That monkey with the orange ass cheeks
  • ****
  • Posts: 254
    • Email
Re: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life
« Reply #64 on: October 24, 2009, 02:44:56 PM »
Oh wow, you guys are still talking about that. It makes me happy  :D

LunaticsLament

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 324
    • Email
Re: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life
« Reply #65 on: October 25, 2009, 09:49:31 PM »
I don't know if anyone had mentioned it yet but the Imbue Gem feat from Magic of Faerun allows you to make some amazing triggered or contingency spells contained in gems.  This feat would allow you to make all sorts of fun contingencied spell combination.
"The capacity of the human mind for swallowing nonsense and spewing it forth in violent and repressive action has never yet been plumbed. "
~Robert Heinlein

Alastar

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1028
    • Email
Re: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life
« Reply #66 on: October 25, 2009, 09:57:17 PM »
A divine rank 0 god would be immortal.

I know it's high but heck... it's an option...

Saxony

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 742
  • My avatar is from the anime "Pani Poni Dash!".
Re: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life
« Reply #67 on: October 25, 2009, 11:21:36 PM »
"
...
When an intelligent undead creature survives for 100 years or more (or when the DM decides to create an undead monster with a twist), there is a 1% chance that its connection to the Negative Energy Plane grows more mature. When this "evolution" occurs, the undead gains this template. Each additional years 100 years of existence affords an additional 1% chance of a more mature connection, plus an additional 1% chance for each previous evolution. For example, if an undead creature's connection to the Negative Energy Plane evolved three times previously, it has a 4% chance to gain one more step of maturation the next time its age requires an evolution check.
...
"
Bolded portions for emphasis.

As you can see, both parts use the exact same language: "an additional 1% chance".  This means that both are to be treated the same and thus both cumulative.  Assuming the undead has the absolute worst of luck, he still has an increasing chance every 100 years of obtaining the template.  After 100 centuries, it totals up to a garuntee of 100%.

If the time existing was meant to be treated as a flat 1% chance, then it would be written more along the lines of "Each additional 100 years of existance, the undead has a 1% chance to form a more mature connection plus an additional 1% chance for each previous evolution"  It would have been stated as an absolute instead of those key words "an additional".

Thus, each century of existance increases the chance of evolving, whether they have evolved before or not.
You definitely have an argument for your point. The most simple expression that conveys the same meaning wouldn't have had the "additional" qualifying adjective attached to "1% chance". The fact that the writer already used the word "additional" once in the same sentence tells me that really did mean to attach that second "additional" qualifying adjective to the phrase "1% chance". However... they could have just worded  the sentence they meant to say in an awkward way.

The example they give, following immediately after the sentence in contention, makes no reference to "centuries existed". I would think that they'd put that in there.

So we both have arguments for our side... Yours is that the writers wouldn't have said additional twice on accident, mine is that they would have written the example with the "centuries existed" clause if your argument was right. So it's a judgment call.

I'll try to figure out the math for your case later on.

Quote
The fast healing bit, I'm quoting other people on.  I haven't actually seen rules regarding this either.
Thank you for admitting that. I'm not sure either, and you could be still right. There may be ruling elsewhere than the core books.
If I say something about real world physics, and someone disagrees, assume I am right 90% of the time. This number goes up to 100% if I am late night posting - trust me, my star dust sibs.

PhaedrusXY

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 8022
  • Advanced Spambot
Re: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life
« Reply #68 on: October 25, 2009, 11:24:59 PM »
Yours is that the writers wouldn't have said additional twice on accident, mine is that they would have written the example with the "centuries existed" clause if your argument was right. So it's a judgment call.
Like every other example ever printed in a D&D book is wrong somehow. Seriously. They are like the worst thing you can use to figure out how the rules are supposed to work.
[spoiler]
A couple of water benders, a dike, a flaming arrow, and a few barrels of blasting jelly?

Sounds like the makings of a gay porn film.
...thanks
[/spoiler]

The_Mad_Linguist

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 8780
  • Simulated Thing
Re: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life
« Reply #69 on: October 25, 2009, 11:49:09 PM »
The additional 1% chance grants you another d100 roll.  I f you have the template n times, you toll n+1 dice and check if an of them rolled a 00.
Linguist, Mad, Unique, none of these things am I
My custom class: The Priest of the Unseen Host
Planetouched Handbook
Want to improve your character?  Then die.

Saxony

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 742
  • My avatar is from the anime "Pani Poni Dash!".
Re: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life
« Reply #70 on: October 26, 2009, 12:07:51 AM »
Their example directly followed their reasoning. It wasn't just in the same paragraph, it was the next sentence, the very next thought. You'd think they would have mentioned something important to the formula in their example. As it is, they didn't mention anything like the "centuries existed" clause.

Right now, I say its a judgment call, and that both sides are equally valid.
If I say something about real world physics, and someone disagrees, assume I am right 90% of the time. This number goes up to 100% if I am late night posting - trust me, my star dust sibs.

Saxony

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 742
  • My avatar is from the anime "Pani Poni Dash!".
Re: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life
« Reply #71 on: October 26, 2009, 12:15:36 AM »
The additional 1% chance grants you another d100 roll.  I f you have the template n times, you toll n+1 dice and check if an of them rolled a 00.

Quote from: Libris Mortis copy and paste
plus an
additional 1% chance for each previous evolution.

I can see why you see that. However the probability is the same either way. Roll x d100's to see if you roll a 1. Or roll 1d100 to see if you roll the numbers 1 through x.


Edit: I'm wrong. Rolling 1d100 to see one rolls either a 01 or a 02 is different from rolling 2d100 to see if one rolled a 01 at all. In the first case, one has a 98% chance of not getting the template. In the second case, one has a .99^2 chance of not getting it.

So, if you accumulate 100 d100's, the chance of not ever rolling a 01 is 36.6%. That isn't the same as 0%.

Again... its an interpretation issue. I can see it both ways. I'll be doing the math for each case of "xd100 or 1d100 with more numbers" and each case of "chance increases every century or chance increases only with more templates".
« Last Edit: October 26, 2009, 12:26:25 AM by Saxony »
If I say something about real world physics, and someone disagrees, assume I am right 90% of the time. This number goes up to 100% if I am late night posting - trust me, my star dust sibs.

PhaedrusXY

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 8022
  • Advanced Spambot
Re: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life
« Reply #72 on: October 26, 2009, 01:44:41 AM »
Ok, after actually reading it, instead of taking other peoples' word for it :P, I agree that you only get the 1% chance every century if you've never gotten the template. Not 1%+1% for every century you've existed.

So yeah, that dramatically changes the amount of time it takes for you to on average have a cumulative 50% chance of having gotten the template already. It's like 7000 years, not 1000.
[spoiler]
A couple of water benders, a dike, a flaming arrow, and a few barrels of blasting jelly?

Sounds like the makings of a gay porn film.
...thanks
[/spoiler]

bayar

  • That monkey with the orange ass cheeks
  • ****
  • Posts: 254
    • Email
Re: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life
« Reply #73 on: October 26, 2009, 07:47:30 AM »
But what is 7000 years for an undead ? It's not like he is going anywhere...

PhaedrusXY

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 8022
  • Advanced Spambot
Re: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life
« Reply #74 on: October 26, 2009, 12:57:09 PM »
But what is 7000 years for an undead ? It's not like he is going anywhere...
Yeah, but those danged paladins are always coming around trying to smite you. In theory, an undead NPC can "live" forever. In practice, they only last until the the next encounter. ;)


This gives me an idea for a thread titled "What's a BBEG to do?"  :D
[spoiler]
A couple of water benders, a dike, a flaming arrow, and a few barrels of blasting jelly?

Sounds like the makings of a gay porn film.
...thanks
[/spoiler]

snakeman830

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3494
  • BG's resident furry min/maxxer
Re: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life
« Reply #75 on: October 26, 2009, 02:50:07 PM »
But what is 7000 years for an undead ? It's not like he is going anywhere...
Yeah, but those danged paladins are always coming around trying to smite you. In theory, an undead NPC can "live" forever. In practice, they only last until the the next encounter. ;)
This is why I always run it where Undead != Evil.  It's funny when Paladins auto-assume undead are evil and waste their smite attempts.
I am constantly amazed by how many DM's ban Tomb of Battle.  The book doesn't even exist!

Quotes:[spoiler]
By yes, she means no.
That explains so much about my life.
hiicantcomeupwithacharacterthatisntaghostwhyisthatamijustretardedorsomething
Why would you even do this? It hurts my eyes and looks like you ate your keyboard before suffering an attack of explosive diarrhea.
[/spoiler]

If using Genesis to hide your phylactry, set it at -300 degrees farenheit.  See how do-gooders fare with a liquid atmosphere.

bayar

  • That monkey with the orange ass cheeks
  • ****
  • Posts: 254
    • Email
Re: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life
« Reply #76 on: October 26, 2009, 03:53:53 PM »
But what is 7000 years for an undead ? It's not like he is going anywhere...
Yeah, but those danged paladins are always coming around trying to smite you. In theory, an undead NPC can "live" forever. In practice, they only last until the the next encounter. ;)


Well, you could always sit tight in your coffin/crypt like a nice dead thing, pretending to be dead, doing nothing for a couple of millenia. You cant go crazy while being undead, right ?


Or just disintegrate the ground below you a couple of times, build a secret chamber, pay someone to bury you under a shatload of concrete. Have your secret room be divination proof.

PhaedrusXY

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 8022
  • Advanced Spambot
Re: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life
« Reply #77 on: October 26, 2009, 03:58:40 PM »
Well, you could always sit tight in your coffin/crypt like a nice dead thing, pretending to be dead, doing nothing for a couple of millenia. You cant go crazy while being undead, right ?
I think all undead are basically already crazy by definition. Does the term sociopath mean anything to you? ;) It's hard to retain empathy for "fleshies" after a few centuries of never feeling any of the same things they do. I bet they do get bored, though. At least the ones that aren't mindless...
[spoiler]
A couple of water benders, a dike, a flaming arrow, and a few barrels of blasting jelly?

Sounds like the makings of a gay porn film.
...thanks
[/spoiler]

The_Mad_Linguist

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 8780
  • Simulated Thing
Re: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life
« Reply #78 on: October 26, 2009, 04:31:16 PM »
Well, you could always sit tight in your coffin/crypt like a nice dead thing, pretending to be dead, doing nothing for a couple of millenia. You cant go crazy while being undead, right ?
I think all undead are basically already crazy by definition. Does the term sociopath mean anything to you? ;) It's hard to retain empathy for "fleshies" after a few centuries of never feeling any of the same things they do. I bet they do get bored, though. At least the ones that aren't mindless...
what are you taalking about?  Undead have feelings too!
Linguist, Mad, Unique, none of these things am I
My custom class: The Priest of the Unseen Host
Planetouched Handbook
Want to improve your character?  Then die.

McPoyo

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3783
    • Email
Re: Immortality: A Guide to Eternal Life
« Reply #79 on: October 26, 2009, 05:41:40 PM »
Well, you could always sit tight in your coffin/crypt like a nice dead thing, pretending to be dead, doing nothing for a couple of millenia. You cant go crazy while being undead, right ?
I think all undead are basically already crazy by definition. Does the term sociopath mean anything to you? ;) It's hard to retain empathy for "fleshies" after a few centuries of never feeling any of the same things they do. I bet they do get bored, though. At least the ones that aren't mindless...
what are you taalking about?  Undead have feelings too!
*resisting urge to post musical video of Richard*
[Spoiler]
A gygaxian dungeon is like the world's most messed up game show.

Behind door number one: INSTANT DEATH!
Behind door number 2: A magic crown!
Behind door number 3: 4d6 giant bees, and THREE HUNDRED POUNDS OF HONEY!
They don't/haven't, was the point. 3.5 is as dead as people not liking nice tits.

Sometimes, their tits (3.5) get enhancements (houserules), but that doesn't mean people don't like nice tits.

Though sometimes, the surgeon (DM) botches them pretty bad...
Best metaphor I have seen in a long time.  I give you much fu.
Three Errata for the Mage-kings under the sky,
Seven for the Barbarian-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal Monks doomed to die,
One for the Wizard on his dark throne
In the Land of Charop where the Shadows lie.
[/spoiler]