Dicefreaks d20 Community

For sometime, I've been designing cosmic entities without rank bonuses, and gods with. Eventually, it just doesn't work out right, something that the DF new power rules attempted to address.

However, the powers that rank gives, even beyond the simple immunities, cause certain objective issues. AC is an absolute value, if you can't hit it, you can't damage. Saves are another, if your bonus is higher than any possible DC, you can't fail them. These things rocket up quickly.

However, in d20, there is another form of power and limitation, that being action economy. So I got to thinking. What if the numerical bonuses for rank were eliminated? What if it were replaced with action economy?

Demi - +1 divine bonus to atk, AC, saves, checks, skills, +1 full round action. +5 rank checks
Lesser - +2 divine bonus to atk, AC, saves, checks, skills, +2 full round actions. +10 rank checks
Intermediate - +3 divine bonus to atk, AC, saves, checks, skills, +3 full round actions. +15 rank checks
Greater - +4 divine bonus to atk, AC, saves, checks, skills, +4 full round actions. +20 rank checks

Overgod* - +10 divine bonus to atk, AC, saves, checks, skills, +10 full round actions. +30 rank checks
*For theoretical stats only

I still might use rank as a guideline for how many SDAs or whatnot to give, but AW has always been about streamlining these things into something more playable and comparable.


The additional full round actions come at iterative initiative counts, so a demipower goes once on his rolled initiative and once on that -5. A greater power goes on the roll, -5, -10, -15 and -20. In addition, any negative status effect lasting rounds has its duration burned through every time a power takes its turn. So if you normally slow a creature for 20 rounds, a greater power is going to suffer the negative effects for four rounds before the duration has expired. Positive effects, such as the power using an attack that causes the victim to be staggered 'until your (the power) next turn' still function normally, and thus last an entire round of initiative.

Giving additional actions makes the powers serious challenges to anyone. If a greater power's init -20 is still higher than yours, that's five full rounds of attacks or spells you eat. Also, it makes it harder for a power to be overwhelmed in combat through a team effort, which can quickly deplete a being's hit points no matter what their defenses. Ideally, the power will get to react to most actions immediately. Yes, this makes it harder, but that's why they call it epic.

I've done this for boss fights. I found that it about does what you think it does. If anything I found it too powerful, especially at higher levels when a few volleys of spells, SLAs or supernatural abilities can obliterate a party. The party blowing init can mean they eat 2-3 rounds of actions from the boss alone, before you even think if he has any support or minions around. If that's what you want? It works.

Ryu Hayabusa wrote:I've done this for boss fights. I found that it about does what you think it does. If anything I found it too powerful, especially at higher levels when a few volleys of spells, SLAs or supernatural abilities can obliterate a party. The party blowing init can mean they eat 2-3 rounds of actions from the boss alone, before you even think if he has any support or minions around. If that's what you want? It works.

If the party ever gets to the point where a fight with a power is not a 'boss fight', they've already likely transcended the point at which stats are meaningful.

It helps if instead of taking all those actions at once, the deity rolls initiative that many times and acts on all of those inits.

veekie wrote:It helps if instead of taking all those actions at once, the deity rolls initiative that many times and acts on all of those inits.

Veekie, if you've read the entire thing, you will see that the deity rolls init once, and acts on that count, then -5, then -10, and so on, so forth.

This keeps rolling to a minimum.

For instance, take Thor, greater god with initiative of +10. He goes up against a group of 4 PCs. For the sake of simplicity, we'll use my PCs. Heinrick +4, Kat +9, Einar +4 and Alyssa +7

Thor rolls an 18 for 28.
Heinrick rolls a 2 for 6
Einar rolls a 13 for 17
Alyssa rolls a 7 for 14
Kat rolls a 5 for 14

Thor acts on 28, 23, 18, 13 and 8. So the init order is Thor1, Thor2, Thor3, Einar, Alyssa, Kat, Thor4, Thor5, Heinrick

So a dozen needles in the jugular instead of a single knife, huh?

I have to say I'm intruiged.

How would this function for a guy like Demogorgon who already does the multiple action thing?

Kain Darkwind wrote:If the party ever gets to the point where a fight with a power is not a 'boss fight', they've already likely transcended the point at which stats are meaningful.

Well, yeah. I thought he said his comments were from using it in boss fights, though, not anything else?

I find this to be intriguing. As with all design efforts, it can't really be validated solely on paper, but it looks like it could work really well.

KingCrazyGenius wrote:So a dozen needles in the jugular instead of a single knife, huh?

I have to say I'm intruiged.

How would this function for a guy like Demogorgon who already does the multiple action thing?

He would take a dual action on each init count.

Coriat wrote:

Kain Darkwind wrote:If the party ever gets to the point where a fight with a power is not a 'boss fight', they've already likely transcended the point at which stats are meaningful.

Well, yeah. I thought he said his comments were from using it in boss fights, though, not anything else?

Yes. The comment merely confirms that power fights are boss fights in my eyes, and refers more to his question at the end.

I think you'd have to abandon the idea of PCs fighting powers that were multiple CRs higher than them with this idea, because you've effectively turned the combat into one against multiple enemies, at least for the first round.

To take your sample initiative, the odds of the PCs being left standing after 3 full rounds of actions by Thor are slim to none. Odds are he effectively kills a PC with each action.

I think we saw just how brutal even two initiative counts are in our last boss fight in your game Kain, when your spear wielder of doom nearly killed the entire party.

Also, Demogorgon taking 8 actions a round is absurd. The only way I could see a party taking on a foe like that is if each party member were statistically more powerful than him in almost every other way.

To comment a little more:

I'm not surprised to hear Ryu had issues with it being too powerful for his boss fights. Extra actions in Dnd are far and away more powerful than any other kind of buff. On my first glance I would value the extra actions significantly higher than the higher divine bonuses in terms of overall power. A demipower is certainly going to get far more mileage out of extra actions than it would out of +2 or +3 in missing divine bonuses to hit/saves. If nothing else he can use an extra turn to get those bonuses and more, and be better off than before - or he can also take a tactically more appropriate action to the fight and do even better, but my point is that a full round of actions will almost always be stronger than a +1-4 bonus. I suspect the same advantage scales to higher bonuses and more rounds.

Aluroon wrote:I think we saw just how brutal even two initiative counts are in our last boss fight in your game Kain, when your spear wielder of doom nearly killed the entire party.

Also, Demogorgon taking 8 actions a round is absurd. The only way I could see a party taking on a foe like that is if each party member were statistically more powerful than him in almost every other way.

There are other ways (minions/allies were a major help with Ulioth in soaking his dual actions) but I agree that when the number of extra rounds gets to obscene levels, like Demogorgon's theoretical eight, then you would probably need either PCs more powerful individually than Demogorgon otherwise is, or so many/so powerful allies that the PCs are not really at the center of their side of the fight. Whether that's okay is up to you of course, or if you can come up with third routes.

Now, aside from all that, a suggestion. I find it easier to accept the idea of Thor smiting the party with chain lightning, intimidating a PC with his horrible glare, and smashing another with his hammer in one round than I do "thor goes first and makes three full attacks" or "thor glares at you. Stupid bravery, he tries again. Okay, again." Perhaps a restriction on taking the same type of action in the same round?

I'll start by saying I like the idea of multiple counts in initiative. Less number-boosters in epic can only be a good thing, and also fits with the idea of Powers being one-man armies. Against large numbers of lesser foes in particular this would ensure they wouldn't be overwhelmed by economy of actions.

I do agree that it is very powerful. Effectively you're fighting several of the same creature, only with a shared hp total. If the Power rolls high on initiative then even more so. Another way of doing it could be to add the clause the Power can't act for two initiative counts in a row. Then you'd have Thor1, Einar, Thor2, Alyssa, Thor3, Kat, Thor4, Heinrick, Thor5.

8 actions though is definitely pretty crazy. I'd simply give Demogorgonan extra standard than full-round action.

You know when I was reading this the first thing that came to mind was a spellcasting heavy power. I mean Time Stop already gives your free turns in a rounds so whats to stop some great power who can take 5 turns from using those very actions to give itself even more actions. Throw in quicken spells and maybe they could even wipe out a small party in one round or even have them on the ropes before they get to their turns due to rolls.

I admit I have not played in any setting where I have reached epic yet but thats just what I think, feel free to set me straight.

Regarding Demogorgon and 8 theoretical actions, that would be only if he were an intermediate power.

Regarding a restriction on actions, I don't find that to be best done in rules, but rather from the DM playing the power to be as impressive as possible.

Regarding Demogorgon getting 'an extra standard action', no. Dual actions will be retained.

Regarding rules that a power has to take init counts in stagger, what happens if he has more actions than opponents? Unneeded restriction, the negatives already ensure that the deity has as low of a chance as possible to go 5 times ahead of everyone. If the power is likely to go five times before you can get an action off, you ought to consider not fighting. Powers still ought to be fought under the most extreme circumstances.

As far as being like fighting multiple creatures...that's the point. It keeps the fight from lasting two rounds once it moves into full attacks, or from turning into a missfest because the power's 'power' comes from shockingly high defenses.

There are a few differences between fighting a creature that can act on 5 init accounts and 5 creatures. (even assuming just 5x hp and identical other stats) Same concept applies to a creature that can act on 2 init accounts with 2x hp.

First, battlefield control is easier. One target is simply easier to affect than multiple.

Two, initial round favors the power. He must only spend one of his turns moving into full attack position, where multiple characters need to spend all of their actions moving into position.

Three, subsequent rounds do not drop off. Against multiples, strategy often rewards focusing on single foes and eliminating them one at a time. The offense of a power does not drop over the course of the combat until they die or retreat.

Four, debuffing is a superior tactic. One target is simply easier to affect than multiple.

There are both pros and cons to a team facing a multi-action boss and a multiple foe battle.

Except powers are virtually always going to pass their saves and are immune to the vast majority of debuffing.

Kain Darkwind wrote:Regarding Demogorgon and 8 theoretical actions, that would be only if he were an intermediate power.

If this should be taken to mean he's a greater Power with 10 per round, I don't see how anything short of another greater Power could be expected to compete with that.

Aluroon wrote:Except powers are virtually always going to pass their saves and are immune to the vast majority of debuffing.

Ideally, without giving them a +10 bonus to saves, that will be able to be kept more in line, although naturally still hard.

To be clear though, I do not consider powers to be 'typical' fights, even boss fights, even in epic. They should be approached with the most caution and planning of any conflict.

Urizen wrote:

Kain Darkwind wrote:Regarding Demogorgon and 8 theoretical actions, that would be only if he were an intermediate power.

If this should be taken to mean he's a greater Power with 10 per round, I don't see how anything short of another greater Power could be expected to compete with that.

Technically, he would act with dual actions on 5 init counts were he a greater power. And he's been Prince of Demons for countless eons...there is a reason for that.

Re: this makes gods too hard, cry cry

In the canon and history of the game, powers are only infrequently slain; only very rarely is this done by mortals (read: non-powers). Conflict with a god should mostly be done by other gods (a party of deities, even less powerful than the target, will be extremely effective against a single god under these rules), or by mortals so powerful that they probably could be gods if they wanted. I know at DF we want to make gods statted and challengeable, but it's also important to maintain in-game history and power levels.

bluegodjanus wrote: I know at DF we want to make gods statted and challengeable, but it's also important to maintain in-game history and power levels.

I think the theme at DF has been gods statted and unchallengeable, actually.

Kain Darkwind wrote:Regarding rules that a power has to take init counts in stagger, what happens if he has more actions than opponents? Unneeded restriction, the negatives already ensure that the deity has as low of a chance as possible to go 5 times ahead of everyone.

Do note that there is a good chance of the power in question acting a lot of turns in a row at the end of the round; init count -X giving low results will stack up a lot of actions at the end for more average init results, since it's not usual for other combatants to have their turns between counts like 0, -5 or -10.

Not as harsh as taking them at the beginning, but a lot of turns in a row are still hard to deal with. Ofc this could be desirable for you, but worth pointing out anyway.

First, battlefield control is easier. One target is simply easier to affect than multiple.

I don't think you'll find this to be the case, and actually, I think the opposite. I would expect the majority of battlefield control to be much less effective against one target with five actions than five targets with one action. You can't divide and conquer one character by manipulating the environment (like you might split a group of five into two groups of two and three with a prismatic wall), barriers that require actions to circumnavigate (such as moving around or teleporting past a barrier) will eat one of five actions rather than five of five actions, one creature with the ability to move around and still make full attacks is harder for martial types to keep away from casters than five creatures who all still need to make their own decisions between maneuver and offense, if you back off of five creatures they need to take five actions to close again, etc.

Four, debuffing is a superior tactic. One target is simply easier to affect than multiple.

Are powers still going to be immune to most debuffs, though?

In any case, this is true but not really a power down - buffs are the opposite side of the coin and are similarly magnified.

More to say, switching classrooms.

resuming:

bluegodjanus wrote:Re: this makes gods too hard, cry cry

Gods ought to be hard and you will find no argument on that from me. However, since Kain is posing the what if I did this question, I attempt to answer.

So my opinion of the what-if answer is that in general, replacing the gods' numerical bonuses with extra actions in this fashion will lead to a general and significant increase in their challenge to parties - the extra actions would be worth more than the bonuses are.

I don't think any sort of clean comparison with fighting 5 creatures vs fighting one creature with 5x actions can be made, in that offensive potential of 5x actions is significantly higher than 5 creatures taking one set of actions, but the hp are significantly lower. The extra actions affect combat in a much more asymmetric and difficult to judge way.

Coriat wrote:

Kain Darkwind wrote:Regarding rules that a power has to take init counts in stagger, what happens if he has more actions than opponents? Unneeded restriction, the negatives already ensure that the deity has as low of a chance as possible to go 5 times ahead of everyone.

Do note that there is a good chance of the power in question acting a lot of turns in a row at the end of the round; init count -X giving low results will stack up a lot of actions at the end for more average init results, since it's not usual for other combatants to have their turns between counts like 0, -5 or -10.

Not as harsh as taking them at the beginning, but a lot of turns in a row are still hard to deal with. Ofc this could be desirable for you, but worth pointing out anyway.

Once the battle has progressed beyond the initial round, three turns in a row is harsh regardless of whether or not it is 'at the beginning'. However, demipowers and lesser powers, the most likely to be encountered, only have a few additional rounds and not as extreme penalties.

The way I personally would play it out in the case of a power with a lot of init counts before the players is to delay until after the next PC, in order to provide the most dynamic combat available.

First, battlefield control is easier. One target is simply easier to affect than multiple.

I don't think you'll find this to be the case, and actually, I think the opposite. I would expect the majority of battlefield control to be much less effective against one target with five actions than five targets with one action. You can't divide and conquer one character by manipulating the environment (like you might split a group of five into two groups of two and three with a prismatic wall), barriers that require actions to circumnavigate (such as moving around or teleporting past a barrier) will eat one of five actions rather than five of five actions, one creature with the ability to move around and still make full attacks is harder for martial types to keep away from casters than five creatures who all still need to make their own decisions between maneuver and offense, if you back off of five creatures they need to take five actions to close again, etc.

One force cage or resilient sphere, one entangle, etc. I see the points you make, and I think they would fall under a point I didn't put in, that AoE are less effective against a power than a multi-combat.

Four, debuffing is a superior tactic. One target is simply easier to affect than multiple.

Are powers still going to be immune to most debuffs, though?

In any case, this is true but not really a power down - buffs are the opposite side of the coin and are similarly magnified.

More to say, switching classrooms.

I don't see that powers need to be immune to most debuffs. Some things like ability drain and energy drain present an issue. My biggest concern is ensuring that there is never a "just do blah blah blah and it's easy" answer for a combat with a power.

Kain Darkwind wrote:One force cage or resilient sphere, one entangle, etc. I see the points you make, and I think they would fall under a point I didn't put in, that AoE are less effective against a power than a multi-combat.

Still not with you on battlefield control being a superior option (and it applies to non-aoe battlefield controls such as the aforementioned wall spells just as much). I would expect any power to have means to escape a forcecage or resilient sphere or entangle - they are at that point a tax on actions, forcing the target to spend actions to avoid or escape, not a fight winner.

But again. Trap two devils in a forcecage, they spend two actions teleporting out. Trap one devil with two turns in a forcecage, it spends one teleporting out and one hitting you. Put up a wind wall between you and two archers, they both spend moves or double moves to get through/around the wind wall, rather than taking full attacks. Put up a wind wall between you and one archer with two turns, he spends one moving and one full attacking. Etc... Most types of battlefield control spells (with the exception of a few like obscuring mist that focus on concealment rather than obstacles) ultimately boil down to making the enemy spend an action/actions on getting around/out of/through the spell rather than fighting you, so if your enemy has tons of extra actions and can both get out and fight you at the same time, they are not very good.

I think we're defining battlefield control differently then. I've always defined it as the ability to channel your foes into the fight you want to fight, rather than the fight they want to fight. Not action control, but actual manipulation of the battlefield to put your foes where you want them. Obviously, your goals change between 5 foes and 1. There is no 'divide and conquer', but that would also be the case between a super powerful non-multi action foe and a group of foes.

I'm not saying your points aren't salient, just that they apply elsewhere in my mind. Under the definition you seem to espouse, I agree, they would absolutely cause the multi-action foe to be more difficult than the multi-foes.