Subtypes and Crap...
http://bb.bbboy.net/thegamingden-viewthread?forum=6&thread=58
Powered By BbBoard - http://bb.bbboy.net

Maj
20:41:49 Mon
Feb 21 2005
Subtypes and Crap...
Inspired by a raging debate on Nifty and problems with my character in the current game I'm playing, I want to redesign subtypes of the outer planes.

Note: In our games, subtype =/= alignment. For example, a creature with the lawful subtype who has changed its alignment to chaotic will not be affected by spells that target lawful alignments (as it no longer has a lawful alignment).

---

It occured to me after looking up some information about different types in the SRD that there is a subtype for "archon" but not "devil" (or Baatezu). A Hound Archon has the subtypes Archon, Extraplanar, Good, and Lawful. A Pit Fiend is Evil, Extraplanar, and Lawful.

An archon is, by definition, lawful and good, so why does it need its own subtype? If it does need its own subtype, why isn't there a corresponding subtype for devils and demons? For that matter, why not a good + chaotic subtype for the celestials that live in Arboria (Guardinals?)?

The law, chaos, good, and evil don't really do a damned thing except screw an outsider if their alignment changes and provide one way of overcoming damage reduction. Since we don't play with 3.5 damage reduction, in our games the subtypes just end up being stupid.

So...

I was considering doing something to alter the subtypes. Outsiders (creatures native to one of the outer planes) would have a type according to the plane they're native to, and that type brings certain perks (keep in mind this is just on the fly, I'm not done thinking it through and don't really have my heart set on anything):

  • Lawful - Immunity to Electricity
  • Chaotic - Immunity to Acid
  • Good - Immunity to Cold
  • Evil - Immunity to Fire

So, an archon would be lawful and good and be immune to Electricity and Cold.

In addition, I'm considering "families" - like the true devils and true archons, as opposed to creatures who just hang out (like hellfire wyrms) for their own subtype. The devil subtype would exist specifically to label those creatures who not only are native to Baator, but are so intrinsically connected that they have no soul, only an essence that is the mentality and behavior of the plane it's from.

As the rules currently stand, the devil subtype includes abilities like See in Darkness - which is pretty much only an ability to get around the magical darkness of demons because devils can't innately cast the spell, making it dead useless tactically. Basically, I think that's ass.

So I'm looking for some ideas about what to provide as abilities for the "families" in each of the eight major outer planes (Mechanus, Celestia, Elysium, Arboria, Limbo, The Abyss, Hades, and Hell/Baator). I hate the archonic abilities because Teleport without Error in no way is comparable to See in Darkness. Not only that, but aside from effects such as tongues (which I feel all outsiders ought to have), I'm disinclined to give spells out as supernatural abilities. Or just give spells out, period (though not entirely adverse... maybe Discern Lies would be archonically appropriate?).

Any suggestions?


FrankTrollman
09:44:30 Tue
Feb 22 2005
Re: Subtypes and Crap...
Quote: Maj

It occured to me after looking up some information about different types in the SRD that there is a subtype for "archon" but not "devil" (or Baatezu). A Hound Archon has the subtypes Archon, Extraplanar, Good, and Lawful. A Pit Fiend is Evil, Extraplanar, and Lawful.


That's what you get for reading the SRD. There's totally a Baatezu subtype and a Tanar'ri subtype. Just pop open the actual monster manual and check it out. The SRD doesn't contain them because the words Baatezu and Tanar'ri are considered copyrighted materials. Dumb but true.

I don't know how much of the rest of your thought process falls apart over that, but then I didn't read your raging debate about subtypes, for obvious reasons. Of course, unless and until you are talking about the D&D subtype of Augmented (Fillinblank), there's no mysteries about how they "work". Unfortunately.

The long story short is that there even is a special subtype for NG, and it's called "Deva", but for reasons that noone cares about, it's not listed as a subtype. But noone cares. Really, noone cares. There are even Deva only rules, and they don't handle it with a subtype but with putting the word "Deva" into the monster entry which works exactly like a subtype in every way. So the Abyssal Maw is a CE outsider and doesn't have the Tanar'ri powers because it lacks the Tanar'ri subtype. The Lupinal is a NG outsider and lacks the special Deva powers because it doesn't have the word "Deva" in its title. And then the 3.5 monster manual went in and put the Deva rules into the Angel subtype, so now you have to have an argument as to whether Movanic Devas have Tongues or not and their status as regards electricity damage.

---

Now, traditionally, Chaotic Things respond well to Electricity. Or at least, that's what the Demons do. They are immune to the shiznit, which since noone gives a rat's ass about the combat stats of celestials, means that if you make Chaos become immune to Acid instead of electricity everyone's heads are going to explode.

Quote: Maj

As the rules currently stand, the devil subtype includes abilities like See in Darkness - which is pretty much only an ability to get around the magical darkness of demons because devils can't innately cast the spell, making it dead useless tactically. Basically, I think that's ass.


Are you high? That is the single most powerful ability that anyone ever gets. It allows them to see. In the dark. At unlimited range. Noone else has that. They are the only people in the entire fvcking game who can do jack diddly on a moonless night at over 200 feet. A Baatezu with a bow pretty much wins D&D.

-Frank
Maj
19:36:19 Tue
Feb 22 2005
Re: Subtypes and Crap...
Quote: FrankTrollman

That's what you get for reading the SRD. There's totally a Baatezu subtype and a Tanar'ri subtype. Just pop open the actual monster manual and check it out. The SRD doesn't contain them because the words Baatezu and Tanar'ri are considered copyrighted materials. Dumb but true.


Actually, there isn't a subtype for Baatezu and Tanar'ri. In 3.0, there were individual listings for Celestial qualities, Baatezu qualities, and Tanar'ri qualities.

In 3.5, they split up the Celestial qualities into official subtypes for the archons (LG) and the angels (NG + CG). They didn't even distinguish between guardinal and eladrin. And they certainly didn't make the Baatezu and Tanar'ri qualities - they're still in the SRD under Devil and Demon -into subtypes, either (or yugoloth).

So why would they do this? What's the point of making a subtype? What's the difference between a list of racial traits and a subtype?

Quote: Frank

Are you high? That is the single most powerful ability that anyone ever gets. It allows them to see. In the dark. At unlimited range. Noone else has that. They are the only people in the entire fvcking game who can do jack diddly on a moonless night at over 200 feet. A Baatezu with a bow pretty much wins D&D.


Obviously I need to be playing my non-Baatezu stupider. Thanx for the tip.


FrankTrollman
20:26:33 Tue
Feb 22 2005
Re: Subtypes and Crap...
Quote: Maj

Actually, there isn't a subtype for Baatezu and Tanar'ri.


Um... no. That's complete horseshit. As I already explained, the Baatezu subtype is not in the SRD because it is a copyrighted word and not open gaming licence. But it's totally fvcking there in the actual 3.5 Monster Manual. You might as well say that Displacer Beasts aren't in D&D because the legal department forgot where the prior art was on that one and is illegally attemping to enforce exclusivity on those scampy creatures. (Which they will continue to do until someone actually gets threatened with legal action over it and sends their legal department some pulp novels)

Quote: Monster Manual, page 306, version 3.5


Baatezu Subtype: Many devils belong to an evil race known as the baatezy.
Traits: A baatezu possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature's entry).
-Immunity to fire and poison.
-Resistance to acid 10 and cold 10.
-See in Darkness (Su): All baatezu can see perfectly in darkness of any kind, even that created by a deeper darkness spell.
-Summon (Sp): Baatezu share the ability to summon others of their kind (the success chance and type of baatezu summoned are noted in each monster description).
-Telepathy


Now, this is a fvcked up entry, because it gives them the Summon ability by subtype, but actually doesn't because it doesn't give them any baseline. Also the Telepathy is not given a range. This means that despite the fact that Lemures (who are Baatezu) don't mention the fact that they have Summon Baatezu or Telepathy, they actually do have those abilities because they also don't mention not having them. But they aren't actually given values, so the Lemure can summon nothing (which is occassionally different from not being able to summon anything), and has telepathy that has no range (which is a crap tonne different from not having Telepathy).

Quote: Maj

They didn't even distinguish between guardinal and eladrin.


OK, RTFM. I don't normally say that kind of thing, because I think it's rude. But in this case it's extremely warranted. I'm looking at the Monster Manual. Right now. It has an Eladrin subtype in it.

Quote: Monster Manal, page 308, version 3.5


Eladrin Subtype: Eladrins are a race of celestials, or good outsiders, native to the Olympian Glades of Arborea.
Traits: An eladrin possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature's entry):
-Darkvsion out to 60 feet and low-light vision.
-Immunity to electricity and petrification.
-Resistance to cold 10 and fire 10.
-Tongues (Su): All eladrins can speak with any creature that has a language, as though using a tongues spell (caster level 14th). This ability is always active.


Right... so basically your entire plan here revolves around you not reading the book and spouting off total gibberish. I can immediately see why this argument got so large and heated on Nifty - if it managed to get "raging" without once any person ever just popping out the actual book and resolving it... all I can do is shake my head in disgust.
:bash:

Quote: Maj

So why would they do this? What's the point of making a subtype?


Ideally, the point of making a subtype is to make things easier, by having all the creatures which have specific effects that nail them have a unifying subtype so that you can figure out who's affected by what. So Jovoc blasts bypass all Tanar'ri, so it's important to keep track of who has the Tanar'ri subtype and who doesn't. That's why if you open up the monster manual to page 45, you see that the Nalfeshnee has the Tanar'ri subtype, and when you open it to page 46 you note that the Quasit and Retriever do not.

Unfortunately, Andy Collins is a god damned moron, and decided to move some of the pertinent game information out of the creature entries and into the subtypes so that they would be harder to find. Now the See in Darkness ability is defined in the Baatezu subtype instead of the Devil monster entry, which would be way easier if you were hypothetically a computer, but is in fact a major pain in the ass.

All subtypes should just be like the Reptillian subtype. Which, btw, Dragons should totally fvcking have.

Yeah, the inner workings of the subtype rules are a flaming pile of animal dung - but if read the fvcking book you could actually be having a menaingful discussion about what they are instead of just throwing your hands up in the air about the fact that you can't find pieces of information in an incomplete document.

-Frank
Maj
21:57:34 Tue
Feb 22 2005
Re: Subtypes and Crap...
I sit corrected. I didn't understand what you were trying to say before because the things listed as Baatezu subtypes are listed in the SRD under "Devil" and called "Devil Traits" - so they're there, but they're not listed under the "subtypes" section - which is ina totally different place.

:sad:

Quote: Frank

I can immediately see why this argument got so large and heated on Nifty - if it managed to get "raging" without once any person ever just popping out the actual book and resolving it... all I can do is shake my head in disgust.


Actually, the debate was on whether or not a succubus could become a paladin.
FrankTrollman
22:07:21 Tue
Feb 22 2005
Re: Subtypes and Crap...
Quote: Maj

Actually, the debate was on whether or not a succubus could become a paladin.


Step 1: Use a Helmet of Opposite alignment.
Step 2: You are Lawful good and qualify for being a Paladin.

Ta-da. Paladin in two easy steps. She'll still have the Chaotic and evil subtypes, so she will count as both Chaotic and Evil in addition to being counted as both Lawful and Good. But Paladin only requires that you be both Lawful and Good, it doesn't actually care whether you are Evil or Chaotic or not.

Interestingly, two Succubus Paladins can't adventure together, because a Paladin can't adventure with people who "are evil" - which the Succubus Paladin still is. But a Succubus Paladin could have another Succubus Paladin as her cohort because she is there restricted to not having cohorts who are not Lawful Good - and the Succubus Paladin is Lawful and Good.

The D&D alignments are kind of stupid, but they work just like the subtypes do - they are designators that you either have or do not have. As soon as Succubus becomes Lawful Good she starts having more subtypes than normally allowed - which makes a lot of things behave in a very confusing and counterintuitive fashion. Still, you just read it straight through and everything "works" just fine.

A Succubus Paladin is immune to Holy Word and Blasphemy because those go off for things that "are not Good/Evil", but she is hit for full strength off of a Holy Smite or Unholy Blight because those spells trigger ff of things which are Good/Evil". Since she is both Good and Evil, she is affected very differently from the way you'd think she would be by consulting your naval about it - but gut feelings don't really mean anything in light of the RAW.

Just read each effect in turn. Any effect that says "If X" triggers, any effect that says "if not X" does not.

-Frank
Maj
22:26:40 Tue
Feb 22 2005
Re: Subtypes and Crap...
May I quote you?
RandomCasualty
23:12:18 Tue
Feb 22 2005
Re: Subtypes and Crap...
Quote: FrankTrollman at 22:07:21 Tue Feb 22 2005


Interestingly, two Succubus Paladins can't adventure together, because a Paladin can't adventure with people who "are evil" - which the Succubus Paladin still is. But a Succubus Paladin could have another Succubus Paladin as her cohort because she is there restricted to not having cohorts who are not Lawful Good - and the Succubus Paladin is Lawful and Good.


This is some funny stuff.
FrankTrollman
00:09:58 Wed
Feb 23 2005
Re: Subtypes and Crap...
Quote: Maj

May I quote you?


Sure. This is an open message board, you could jolly well just post a link to what I wrote since it's literally open to anyone who wants to read it. As such, you inherently have permission to quote anything I write in this context.

Quote: Random Casualty

This is some funny stuff.


You aint kidding. D&D alignment is easy to adjudicate game mechanically, but it doesn't have any moral relavence to anything, which means that it is completely useless for the thing it's supposed to be for - namely the evaluation of actions and guilt.

Blasphemy is inherently a more exclusive attack than Unholy Blight - in that everyone who is "not evil" is 6 of the nine basic alignments and everyone who is "Good" is only 3 of the basic alignments. But the nine alignments don't really exist. Actually there are just 6 alignment tags which everyone is required to have at least 2 of - but you can potentially end up with a character who is Lawful Neutral Chaotic Good Neutral Evil. Just start with a True Neutral character and give him all four alignment subtypes.

I'd prefer almost any other ethical system to the one proposed in D&D. It might as well just be a set of shirt colors.

-Frank
Neeek
00:17:31 Wed
Feb 23 2005
Re: Subtypes and Crap...
Quote: FrankTrollman at 22:07:21 Tue Feb 22 2005

Quote: Maj

Actually, the debate was on whether or not a succubus could become a paladin.


Step 1: Use a Helmet of Opposite alignment.
Step 2: You are Lawful good and qualify for being a Paladin.

Ta-da. Paladin in two easy steps. She'll still have the Chaotic and evil subtypes, so she will count as both Chaotic and Evil in addition to being counted as both Lawful and Good. But Paladin only requires that you be both Lawful and Good, it doesn't actually care whether you are Evil or Chaotic or not.


Yes. That was the conclusion reached at Nifty moments after someone claimed you couldn't. Not that the person who claimed you couldn't have a succubus paladin ever agreed.



Maj
01:04:54 Wed
Feb 23 2005
Re: Subtypes and Crap...
Quote: Frank

Sure. This is an open message board, you could jolly well just post a link to what I wrote since it's literally open to anyone who wants to read it. As such, you inherently have permission to quote anything I write in this context.


I'll probably end up doing both, but I know you're not happy with Nifty, so I figure that despite this being a public forum, I'll keep asking anyway.

Thanx.



Here's a link to that thread in case anyone who doesn't regularly post over there wants to risk having their brains addled.


Maj
03:15:34 Thu
Feb 24 2005
Re: Subtypes and Crap...
Look at what I found!

The Online D&D Glossary

Probably a great resource for those people who like online references, or who - like me - don't own a copy of the books.
Guest [Unregistered]
03:19:39 Thu
Feb 24 2005
Re: Subtypes and Crap...
I think that you SHOULD NOT download all the books for free using Kazaa.
MrWaeseL
08:54:10 Thu
Feb 24 2005
Re: Subtypes and Crap...
Fuck Kazaa. DC++ is where it isn't at.
RandomCasualty
09:12:48 Thu
Feb 24 2005
Re: Subtypes and Crap...
DC++? Never heard of it.
rapanui
23:54:48 Sun
Feb 27 2005
Re: Subtypes and Crap...
Yeah, DC++ is definately where it is most certainly (not) at. Ahem.
Oberoni
04:25:13 Mon
Feb 28 2005
Re: Subtypes and Crap...
How do you not use DC++?

If I were using it, I imagine that I could send files pretty easily, but would have trouble finding them. Does anyone know how to hypothetically do this, or what my imaginary problems are?
RandomCasualty
04:42:47 Mon
Feb 28 2005
Re: Subtypes and Crap...
Yeah, I think I might not be having those problems too.

The search which I didn't use doesn't seem to be finding anything.
fbmf
16:09:38 Mon
Feb 28 2005
Re: Subtypes and Crap...
[TGFBS]
Enough of the theoretical problems. Back to the real topic.
[/TGFBS]


Subtypes and Crap...
http://bb.bbboy.net/thegamingden-viewthread?forum=6&thread=58
Powered By BbBoard - http://bb.bbboy.net