The Scorcher has even greater potential for those who know how to unlock it. If a character knows the proper trigger... (basically doubles abilities)
Anyways, I was wondering where this trigger comes from, since there are no mention of it in PAoA. From the novels? Your own idea?
As I was going to convert the Scrocher in 3.5 d20 mechanics, I went to check how athas.org had done it and found this:
The Scorcher has even greater potential for those who know how to unlock it. If a character knows the proper trigger... (basically doubles abilities)
Anyways, I was wondering where this trigger comes from, since there are no mention of it in PAoA. From the novels? Your own idea?
I asked this same question before, and Jon's response was that the 'trigger' is known by Hamanu and would be given or told to the PC's in the third and final adventyre of this series.
Jon?
Instead of giving a small nuke to PCs or anyone who finds it, its a powerful explosive instead, only becoming more powerful if you know the trigger.
Jon had to implement such a concept for the adventure, or so I'm told.
Still, if a 1st level PC finds the Wand of Orcus, any creature with less than 20 levels/HD has good chances of dying instantly upon contact with it, that it breaks the balance of the adventure of not.
Hey, this is the Wand of Orcus...
I hope you like it.
The way is see it going down is that the sword will be used to ward off Dregoth's spells and psionics, whil ethe PC's run in and start killing the additional participants in the spell ritual. According to the rules, killing one does not stop the spell, but it increases the DC but the same amount that the additional participant reduced it by. Kill enough of them and the spell fails due to the DC being too high. Of course then you would have a really mad, psychotic 9th stage dragon to deal with, unless the backlash of the failed spell some how put a tempory stop to Dregoth and wiped the Godhood spell from his mind- that could be kinda cool.
I am just thinking out loud :D
I thought it had something to do with epic DR, which requires +6 weapons. However, if the purpose is simply to avoid it being to powerful, why not simply leave it as is? (a +3 weapon). You could also assume that unless the wielder knows the proper activation means, he can't use its spells unless by accident, reducing its powers significantly. But your way works too I guess.
Oh well. Here's my take:
The Scorcher
The Scorcher is a +3 keen icy burst longsword which is so light and well balanced it can be used with the Weapon Finesse feat. The Scorcher radiates a cold ebony fire when drawn which cannot be stopped or resumed on command as other icy burst weapons. Also, while not considered an epic weapon for the purposes of overcoming damage reduction, the Scorcher is considered both magical and psionic, and has the ability to ignores all magical armor, deflection or resistance bonuses to AC, as well as damage reduction resulting from magical effects.
Additionally, the Scrocher has been forged out of an unidentifiable red metal alloy, which has a hardness of 30 and 60 hit points per inch of thickness. However, the Scorcher cannot be harmed, much less broken, unless it is struck against the Silencer, its sister-sword, a fact unkown to all save Rajaat, and possibly Hamanu, its rightful weilder. Unkown to both of them, the Scorcher would also be destroyed if it was ever swallowed by a water drake, a curious side effect of its nature and creation process.
The Scorcher also grants several magical protections to its owner. When holding the weapon, the weilder is immune to all mind-affecting effects, gains fire resistance 30 and is always protected by both protection against evil and good spell effects.
In addition, the Scorcher allows its wielder to cast the following spells, all at 20th caster level. Upon command, the weilder comes under the effect of a blur spell while wielding the sword, and the effect can be ended or resumed at will. Additionally, the wielder may cast cure serious wounds on herself three times per day, cast true seeing and wall of fire once per day, and cast slay living once per week.
The Scorcher is also an intelligent weapon (Int 12, Wis 10, Cha 12, Ego 34) of Neutral alignment. It can only communicate through empathy, and not directly by speech. The Scorcher is also a weapon of purpose, but that purpose depends on its wielder. When a new owner grasps the weapon, the Scorcher senses what the weilder wants to accomplish with itself and that becomes the purpose of the weapon. Also, each time it is grasped, the Scorcher attempts to cast a geas on its wielder (DC 17) related to that purpose. If the user diverts from that purpose, wether she is under the geas or not, the Scorcher will discontinue all its powers (except the +3 enchantment) and refuse to use any of its powers unless the user can beat its ego.
Finally, should its wielder cease to pursue its purpose for any reason, or is killed, the Scorcher sends out a powerful psionic call to find a new weilder. First, once per day, it can use a powerful version of the read thought power up to a range of 30 miles. It uses this power to locate powerful which could use it for some important purpose. When the Scorcher has found a suitable candidate, it can, once per day, manifest a powerful attraction power (DC 21, range 30 miles) on her, even if the Scorcher does not know the exact location of its target. The attraction will bring the target towards the Scorcher until it is grasped, or the target does not reach its destination and cannot be attracted again.
Currently, the Scorcher is abandonned in a Cave deep in the Valley of Trevain, after its last possessor was killed and brought there by a Nightmare Beast more than a King’s Age ago...
The Scorcher
A) It needs to be epic or there is no point.
B) It should not be intelligent.
And by the way, I doubt wielding a sword with so many powers has "no point", as it will be by far the best weapon PCs can get their hands on against Dregoth anyways. Even with an epic DR it would not naturally overcome, this sword might punch through anyways with the amount of damage it'll deal, not counting all the protections the character wielding it will get.
On the other hand, the Scourge (of Rkard) is the only Sword described with bonuses against the champions (+6 bonus instead of +4). I'd make that one an epic +6 sword.
b) The Scorcher is an intelligent weapon, even if does not have a given intelligence score in PAoA. Clearly, the sword is conscious:
"The sword is considered neutral in alignment, causing it to be driven by whatever its possessor desires most [...] If the wielder wishes the death of a sorcerer-king, then the Scorcher desires nothing more than to once again drink the blood of Rajaat's Champions."
Inanimate objects have no desires, nor are they driven to a task. Additionally:
"If the Scorcher is ever without a purpose [...] it summons someone within a 30 mile radius that would have use of its powers in some sort of campaign. The challenger fights the wielder of the sword for its possession, and the Scorcher's powers do not work for the idle possessor"
The Scorcher is able to percieve and act upon things inanimate objects could not. While this may be an automatic reaction (detecting lack of purpose, summoning worthy wielder, withdrawing powers), it is much easier, and believable, to make it an act of conscious will.
And btw those artifacts found in the DMG are pretty much lame, in case you haven't noticed the power that artifacts can muster in other WotC books.
There is the thing about how "easily" it slew Dregoth, which made the SKs decide to dispose of the weapon, which could indicate that it got through an "epic" DR. However, I should think its ability to pass trough magical bonuses to Armor and DR would have an even greater effect, because the SKs will likely have many such protections on them.
For example, Hamanu, at least, had DR that even the Scourge could barely pierce (The Crimson Legion). If it was the epic DR alone that protected the SKs, he would have had a bit of a problem. However, SKs must constantly have layers of magical and psionic protections, and that makes the Scorcher's original magic ignoring ability much more dangerous than epic weapon status.
An ability, I would point out, that is not present in athas.org's conversion of the weapon.
This is my major complaint with artifacts in D&D d20 system overall. WotC should had come out with some errata or something fixing up the artifacts some once they released the epic handbook, or at least wrote up something of the sort for those that use the epic handbook, otherwise I'll go dig an epic weapon out of the ELH and every single one will be much better than any artifact WotC and others have come up with because they don't keep this in mind when creating them.
An ability, I would point out, that is not present in athas.org's conversion of the weapon.
They are debating putting it or something similar in the weapon.
Yeah I guess that makes sense Nyt. I was pondering over the same thing...
The only thing is that in DS I would have only the Scourge be epic... though the heartwood spear... dang.
Maybe Artifact weapons should simply all be considered epic weapons, no matter their bonus...
Hmm...
Well anyways, my Nightmare beast REALLY scared the hell out of my players last saturday! :D So not sure I'll have to use it... hehe
For example, Hamanu, at least, had DR that even the Scourge could barely pierce (The Crimson Legion). If it was the epic DR alone that protected the SKs, he would have had a bit of a problem. However, SKs must constantly have layers of magical and psionic protections, and that makes the Scorcher's original magic ignoring ability much more dangerous than epic weapon status.
You have it backwards: The Scourge never damaged Hamanu, it stopped cold against his skin after passing through all layers of supernatural protection. The Scourge obviously has an artifact-level ability that allows it to ignore magical/psionic protections, and what stopped it from harmimg him is the little detail that Hamanu alone is the only Champion that is totally immune to it (all other Champions being totally vulnerable).
And yes, it will adress the issues of the red alloy, the rune, the scaling of the power level, the immunity/vulnerability vs Champions, the epicness, its apparent "motivation" (whatever that is), and the fact it can call upon nearby people to come and wield it.
Nearly all of it is already done and on my hard drive.
You have it backwards: The Scourge never damaged Hamanu, it stopped cold against his skin after passing through all layers of supernatural protection. The Scourge obviously has an artifact-level ability that allows it to ignore magical/psionic protections, and what stopped it from harmimg him is the little detail that Hamanu alone is the only Champion that is totally immune to it (all other Champions being totally vulnerable).
Perhaps, although all this is speculation. I would point out that in any case, IF Hamanu had been made the Champion of Champions, his protection against such a blade would have been magical anyways, since he was probably not born with a Scourge resistant skin... ;)
IF Hamanu had been made the Champion of Champions, his protection against such a blade would have been magical anyways, since he was probably not born with a Scourge resistant skin... ;)
Why not? You can make someone genetically immune to a disease that already exists, and so Hamanu can be made resistant to the things most capable of stoping him.
Or, like you seem to imply, the protection can be magical, i.e. Rajaat cast a powerful epic spell when he created Hamanu that had the effect of warding him against the things most capable of stoping him.
Perhaps, although all this is speculation.
All of what is speculation?
It says clear as day in PAoA that of the three artifact swords created by Rajaat, only the Silencer hurts him. True the Scorcher would bypass all his magical bonus to armor and such (if it has the ability to do that), but would still do no damage to Hammanu past that point. Think of him having DR ?/Silencer, heh.
Not sure how many times this has to be said...
If you are going to make an artifact, then they should at least have a +6 bonus to hit, otherwise an epic weapon has it beat regardless of what else it can do.
This is my major complaint with artifacts in D&D d20 system overall. WotC should had come out with some errata or something fixing up the artifacts some once they released the epic handbook, or at least wrote up something of the sort for those that use the epic handbook, otherwise I'll go dig an epic weapon out of the ELH and every single one will be much better than any artifact WotC and others have come up with because they don't keep this in mind when creating them.
It seems to me that Epic item and artifacts are basically the same thing with different names. On top of that you have to realize that the majority of people who play D&D don't use the epic rules at all, so the artifacts are plenty powerful to have earth shattering consquences on in those campaigns.
It seems to me that Epic item and artifacts are basically the same thing with different names.
I would accept that if epic items weren't more powerful than the currently written up artifacts...
On top of that you have to realize that the majority of people who play D&D don't use the epic rules at all, so the artifacts are plenty powerful to have earth shattering consquences on in those campaigns.
You've got facts to back this up right? I wouldn't go so far as saying the majority. Have you looked at the Epic and customization boards recently.
Now, as far as those not using Epic rules, fine, what is written currently is fine, use it as is. But I know I'm in close to the majority when it comes to my feelings on current artifact writeups. For those of us that use Epic rules they're beyond lame for the most part (at least the ones in the DMG are).
Now, as far as those not using Epic rules, fine, what is written currently is fine, use it as is. But I know I'm in close to the majority when it comes to my feelings on current artifact writeups. For those of us that use Epic rules they're beyond lame for the most part (at least the ones in the DMG are).
Not all of them are totally lame- the Staff of the Magi and Hammer of Thunderbolts are my two favorites- But I would agree that they could use some improvements.
I would accept that if epic items weren't more powerful than the currently written up artifacts...
You've got facts to back this up right? I wouldn't go so far as saying the majority. Have you looked at the Epic and customization boards recently.
Now, as far as those not using Epic rules, fine, what is written currently is fine, use it as is. But I know I'm in close to the majority when it comes to my feelings on current artifact writeups. For those of us that use Epic rules they're beyond lame for the most part (at least the ones in the DMG are).
The reason those boards are so active isn't because there are more people who use epic rules than not. It's because the people who do use epic rules are people who spend a lot of time theorizing about and talking about dungeon and dragons. I would imagine that the majority of people on the WotC message boards have or do use epic rules, but I don't think that the people who post on the boards are representative of D&D players as a whole. At least not in all respects. You have to consider that there are a very large number of D&D players who are happy playing their own games with their local group using a small selection of books, who don't post on these forums and many who don't even realize or care that they exist.
Have you ever heard of the concept of the vocal minority, or the silent majority? Just because the epic fans shout the loudest doesn't mean that the volume of their shout is representative of the D&D community as a whole.
I would actually imagine that there is a similar distortion in perception with our own DS community. Because their are so many vocal DS players and because we are so active in delevoping our campaign world, one might think that we have far greater numbers than the Ravenloft players for instance. I would personally be willing to wager that their are more Ravenloft players, however and they are merely less vocal on the WotC MBs.
Not all of them are totally lame- the Staff of the Magi and Hammer of Thunderbolts are my two favorites- But I would agree that they could use some improvements.
Ok, I'll give you that since those are two that I've liked since 2nd ed.
But yeah, improvements wouldn't hurt.
Have you ever heard of the concept of the vocal minority, or the silent majority? Just because the epic fans shout the loudest doesn't mean that the volume of their shout is representative of the D&D community as a whole.
Well, I wouldn't say they shout the loudest, all I'm saying is that I'm not willing to accept your notion that they are in the minority, if anything it's about equal. I know plenty of people that don't post that want to play Epic characters, and so on and so forth.
Maybe back in the day of 2nd ed. and before when they just had High Level campaign books that equaled our Epic books your assertion is right, but I don't think that is the case anymore.
Regardless, some of us do use the ELH rules, therefore we can't just leave the artifacts as is since they are less powerful than than most, if not all Epic items.
I would actually imagine that there is a similar distortion in perception with our own DS community. Because their are so many vocal DS players and because we are so active in delevoping our campaign world, one might think that we have far greater numbers than the Ravenloft players for instance. I would personally be willing to wager that their are more Ravenloft players, however and they are merely less vocal on the WotC MBs.
Yep, totally agree here. I've never held the notion that we are more in number than DL or RL, mainly because those campaign worlds have been around longer and more established, and aren't currently trying to fit their world into the d20 rules. I think that's one of the many reasons why the license hasn't been sold off yet, the number really just aren't there.
All of what is speculation?
- Hamanu being "the Champion of Champions". From what I understand, this is more Abbey's speculation than Canon, although I really like that idea.
- The fact that the Scourge stopped on Hamanu because of some natural immunity instead of magical protections. From what is described, its kind of hard to know if the magic cushioned the blow or if the sword got through, as magical protection could be skin tight. There's no way to know that. And even if he had a natural protection, there's no way to know the magical prorections didn't also hold. (But it could be that way too, I'm just saying that's one interpretation)
It says clear as day in PAoA that of the three artifact swords created by Rajaat, only the Silencer hurts him.
Hmm. Never saw that part. As was Rajaat's design. That's kind of weird as both Silencer and Scorcher were created way before Hamanu ever came, and perhaps even before the Champions too, since it might have been given to his hands in the war against the preservers. And the Silencer was lost before Hamanu became a Champion too...
Oh well, guess there's something to spin with that little info. It also adds to the idea of Hamanu being champion of champions. Hmm... Thanks Nyt! Where would Athas be without Nytcrwlr!
Not sure how many times this has to be said...
Until everyone reads that obscure part of the book I guess...
Hey, what's the Book of Artifacts anyways? I'm sure I'll feel pretty dumb with the answer to that one...
Well in any case, the Scorcher still doesn't need to be epic, but I guess I might make it +6 anyways, since it is more... um... "attuned" to d20 artifacts mechanics that way... hmm...
The fact that the Scourge stopped on Hamanu because of some natural immunity instead of magical protections. From what is described, its kind of hard to know if the magic cushioned the blow or if the sword got through, as magical protection could be skin tight. There's no way to know that. And even if he had a natural protection, there's no way to know the magical prorections didn't also hold. (But it could be that way too, I'm just saying that's one interpretation)
You musn't have read the Prism Pentad in quite a bit of time to keep saying the contrary of what's in that series of novels. At least that's my suspision.
PP2 shows the scene I described above with the sword stopping short after cutting through the defenses. No explenation is given AFAIK. That's in the scene where Rikus strikes at Hamanu on the grounds of his palace.
PP5 explains why the blade stopped short. That's in the scene where all the SKs are confronted with Rikus wielding the Scourge.
Hmm. Never saw that part. As was Rajaat's design. That's kind of weird as both Silencer and Scorcher were created way before Hamanu ever came, and perhaps even before the Champions too, since it might have been given to his hands in the war against the preservers. And the Silencer was lost before Hamanu became a Champion too...
You're starting to see what lots of other people have seen for a few years now (and written about for as long...guess you didn't read those threads :P ): prior design by Rajaat. He probably conceived of the CWs quite before the Preserver Jihad, knew he would create Champions, knew one day he would have to get rid of his Champions once the job was done, and thus made swords for his "defiler warlords" that would, one day, interact with his Champions, i.e. some would be immune to them and some vulnerable.
Oh well, guess there's something to spin with that little info.
It has already been spinned, in half-a-hundred threads by me, Nyt, Xlor, Seker, and a couple of others, for years now. You've been missing on a lot.Hey, what's the Book of Artifacts anyways? I'm sure I'll feel pretty dumb with the answer to that one...
The "Book of Artifacts" is an old 2E hardbound book about artifacts from all AD&D settings, containing the Silencer.
The relevant book to glean the information on Rajaat's three swords, on the other hand, is "Psionic Artifacts of Athas", the 2E Dark Sun book you probably own. Just look under Existing Artifacts, page 4, for that information. And yes, it is an obscure reference, but it does shed light over what happens in the Prism Pentad.
Well in any case, the Scorcher still doesn't need to be epic [...]
Do you really think you can kill a Champion with the current Scorcher, let alone Dregoth? The three swords are clearly not meant to be as punny as, for example, +3 keen longswords. With such a low-powered weapon you'd have difficulty dispatching any 15+ level character from the orc, troll, or whatever race you're supposed to cleanse. It would take a long battle to succeed...or you'd have to use magic or psionics, so why then give uber swords to your Champions if not for them to be used?
If Champions using these swords had to make 2 attacks per round for 15 rounds to kill a single chieftain with DR and a stolen ring of regeneration...well, those Champions would still have been at it today. The swords are probably as useful as high-level spells when it comes to dispatching enemies, so its probably one round, one death. Figure out for yourself what is required for that to be true and you've got the relative power-level of the Scorcher, Silencer, and Scourge.
So, lets make those swords usable, and useful, for Champions.
Note: Ever seen the first The Lord of the Rings movie? When Sauron wades into the enemy army with a mace and each strike with it sends a dozen man hurtling in the air...doesn't that scream "Champion equiped with one of Rajaat's swords" to you?
Until everyone reads that obscure part of the book I guess...
For everyone who doesn't know (hopefully for the last time)...
Page 4 of PAoA:
"Existing Artifacts
This product does not cover four existing artifacts detailed in the Book of Artifacts.
The Obsidian Man of Urik, the Silencer of Bodach, the Rod of Teeth, and the Psychometron of Nerad have been purposely left out of this product to give more
room to new artifacts. Of the four, only the Silencer of Bodach is mentioned below.
This is because of its relationship to the Scourge of Rkard and the Scorcher, which
were also created by the evil pyreen Rajaat. Of these three swords only the Silencer
of Bodach is capable of harming Hamanu of Urik, as was Rajaat’s design. The other
three artifacts remain unchanged."
There was a reason this was designed into Hammanu, which so happen to be lost *before* he became a champion.
;)
Well in any case, the Scorcher still doesn't need to be epic, but I guess I might make it +6 anyways, since it is more... um... "attuned" to d20 artifacts mechanics that way... hmm...
If you don't ever plan on using the ELH and having an epic campaign, then leave it as is. However if you do plan on using the ELH and running an epic campaign then by default artifacts should be a little over par of most epic items. Otherwise, what's the point of them being artifacts?
That's just common sense and good design. Not trying to be critical, some of the stuff WotC does just annoys the hell out of me. :D
Not trying to be critical, some of the stuff WotC does just annoys the hell out of me. :D
Amen brother.
Here, have a
, 'cause WotC sure is entertaining by times.Here are links to the two swords I did conversions on The Sliencer & The Scourge
You musn't have read the Prism Pentad in quite a bit of time to keep saying the contrary of what's in that series of novels. At least that's my suspision.
Been a while indeed, though you'd be surprised at my memory... ;) Helps when you teach history... heh.
But still, lets see...
PP2 shows the scene I described above with the sword stopping short after cutting through the defenses. No explenation is given AFAIK. That's in the scene where Rikus strikes at Hamanu on the grounds of his palace.
Ok. First, while the sword did punch through the defenses, it did punch through. They say the sword rang as if it had hit stone, and when it went through, Rikus yelled in triumphed, so he probably wasn't sure it would get through. A strong sword would still pass through most magical protections simply by hitting in excess of the protections and exceeding DR. Would fit nicely like that. I'd see the scorcher as going straight through naturally.
Then, while it did stop on his skin (which fits the description of PAoA), it did at least hurt him a bit, since it drew some blood. So I guess its DR X/Silencer, as Nyt put it, and not simply immunity. I find that a bit weird, but still, I'll talk about that later...
PP5 explains why the blade stopped short. That's in the scene where all the SKs are confronted with Rikus wielding the Scourge.
I don't have that book close, but I remember the scene, though not them talking about the sword. Dang. Can you give me the gist of it?
You're starting to see what lots of other people have seen for a few years now (and written about for as long...guess you didn't read those threads :P ): prior design by Rajaat. He probably conceived of the CWs quite before the Preserver Jihad, knew he would create Champions, knew one day he would have to get rid of his Champions once the job was done, and thus made swords for his "defiler warlords" that would, one day, interact with his Champions, i.e. some would be immune to them and some vulnerable.
While I did miss a lot of this, I do know that this Champions of Champions theory comes more from Lyn Abbey's work than the original authors of the setting, and while PAoA confirms it, it came out After RaFoaDK, and from what I understand, is considered pseudo-canon because it has some errors in it according to the official timeline.
However, don't get me wrong, I think that Champion of Champions thing is a great idea.
Really? I was talking about why make Hamanu vulnerable to the Silencer. What did you come up with?
The "Book of Artifacts" is an old 2E hardbound book about artifacts from all AD&D settings, containing the Silencer.
The relevant book to glean the information on Rajaat's three swords, on the other hand, is "Psionic Artifacts of Athas", the 2E Dark Sun book you probably own. Just look under Existing Artifacts, page 4, for that information. And yes, it is an obscure reference, but it does shed light over what happens in the Prism Pentad.
Yeah found that one. Was the Artifacts book I was unaware of... hmm... will have to try to find it I guess... Have everything else. on pdf at least...
Do you really think you can kill a Champion with the current Scorcher, let alone Dregoth? The three swords are clearly not meant to be as punny as, for example, +3 keen longswords. With such a low-powered weapon you'd have difficulty dispatching any 15+ level character from the orc, troll, or whatever race you're supposed to cleanse. It would take a long battle to succeed...or you'd have to use magic or psionics, so why then give uber swords to your Champions if not for them to be used?
If Champions using these swords had to make 2 attacks per round for 15 rounds to kill a single chieftain with DR and a stolen ring of regeneration...well, those Champions would still have been at it today. The swords are probably as useful as high-level spells when it comes to dispatching enemies, so its probably one round, one death. Figure out for yourself what is required for that to be true and you've got the relative power-level of the Scorcher, Silencer, and Scourge.
So, lets make those swords usable, and useful, for Champions.
Well, first of all, my Scorcher is far from low powered, even at +3. Immunity to mind-affecting effects, fire resistance 30, slay living, wall of fire, true seeing, getting through magical protections, etc. I mean, if they are to carry a weapon, they'll have a hard time finding a better one...
Now, if the sword can kill Dregoth by itself, of course not. Which is why the whole bunch of them SKs teamed up against him, laying on a barrage of spells and powers on him at the same time.
Same thing with usefulness. The Scorcher would be useful, but probably not as useful as a Champion's repertoire of spells and powers, which is why these weapons were given as complements to the wizard/psion champions, and not simply given to warriors.
Note: Ever seen the first The Lord of the Rings movie? When Sauron wades into the enemy army with a mace and each strike with it sends a dozen man hurtling in the air...doesn't that scream "Champion equiped with one of Rajaat's swords" to you?
Actually no, but now I guess its true, although I'd point out it was Sauron, and not his mace, that probably did that. I'd also point out, as a LotR purist, that Sauron probably didn't do that anyways... :p
Thanks for all the insight!
Shei-Nad you could always check out the Silencer and Scourge versions that I wrote- If you are looking for those items. I had plans to do a write up of the Scorcher, just so I had a version of each made by me, but I have not gotten to it yet.
Here are links to the two swords I did conversions on The Sliencer & The Scourge
Thanks Kaltahnaidrxis uh... hmm... Kalthandrix (sorry, couldn't resist :P)
Thing is, I never looked at the Epic rules. At all. Guess I'll have to do that to really evaluate what would be the correct worth of the Scorcher Artefact in 3.5, since I noticed you upped the bonuses of these artefacts too.
Will go back to look at those then I guess. Thanks!
I'd also point out, as a LotR purist, that Sauron probably didn't do that anyways... :p
Yeah, SAuron was way beefier and at the same time way wimpier in the movies than he was in the books.
In the books it doesn't describe his power anywhere near that magnitude, and it took a freaking army of humans and elves to take him down.
In the movie they tie his arse to the ring, which depowered him quite a bit but at the same time they showed him doing something cool like killing 20 soldiers at once with one hit.
My friend, you just happened to take, for every one of my points, an angle I didn't write about and turned it against my argument...even though my argument did cover that angle...I just didn't write it. If I had, the post would have been several pages long.
I've been spinning all of my ideas about Rajaat's three swords for so long, and to so many people by now (*wink Nyt wink*) that I constantly forget to expose this or that detail.
Goes to show how long discussions on MSN or the phone can succeed at exposing all of the intricacies of your ideas, and how typed discussions are inherently flawed.
Perhaps one day we'll have a live conversation you and me and I'll perhaps succeed at sharing my ideas completely as opposed to partially.
Actually no, but now I guess its true, although I'd point out it was Sauron, and not his mace, that probably did that. I'd also point out, as a LotR purist, that Sauron probably didn't do that anyways... :p
A good example of what I just said above: Of course I know its Sauron and not his mace that's doing that, I'm saying it looks like a "Champion equiped with one of Rajaat's swords". You need a Champion behind the sword to succeed at doing what Sauron does with his mace...I just didn't mention that detail in the post, it was implied (if you don't know* how I think on this subject then you can't know its implied). If you replace Sauron and his mace with a lion-headed man wielding a fiery sword, you get Hamanu slaughtering trolls with the Scorcher. A 1st-level commoner with the Scorcher could not do what Sauron can do with his mace in the movie, it takes lots of BAB and Strength (25+) and epic combat feats (this is D&D after all).
* I've talked anout Rajaat's three swords with Nyt on MSN so extensively that he knows how I think about them...so I don't need to type down everything.
[...] at the same time they showed him doing something cool like killing 20 soldiers at once with one hit.
Although I believe it would take a god in D&D to do something like that, I still think that a Champion with one of Rajaat's swords, with appropriate feats like Whirlwind Attack, and combat buffing spells and powers on him, and the sword enchanted with Complete Arcane's clouting weapon special ability, could do something very close: make an attack against everyone nearby which, hopefuly, inflicts enough damage to kill them outright, and sends them all hurtling 10 feet away.
So you can literally "wade" into an army, each round using Whirlwind Attack and some buffing spell or feat that allows you to move further than a few feet even though you are taking a full attack action.
And what's great about it all is that all of it can be achieved with casting spells, since supplements such as FR's Lost Empires of Faerûn showed you can make spells that confer exotic weapon special abilities on a weapon you wield, so you could make your weapon into a clouting weapon simply by casting a spell.
The trigger is a way to control the power of the sword in the context of the adventure. Its an invention. Either Elonarc or Jon came up with it.
Instead of giving a small nuke to PCs or anyone who finds it, its a powerful explosive instead, only becoming more powerful if you know the trigger.
Jon had to implement such a concept for the adventure, or so I'm told.
Still, if a 1st level PC finds the Wand of Orcus, any creature with less than 20 levels/HD has good chances of dying instantly upon contact with it, that it breaks the balance of the adventure of not.
Hey, this is the Wand of Orcus...
Hmm, I'm not so sure that is a good analogy since the Wand of Orcus in the hands of a level 1 should by all rights suck their soul into it since they have no will power to speak of to resist its vast powers. It also says in your own description of it, anything with less than 20HD that comes in contact with it, dies!
The Scrorcher already had a limiting factor in that it was semi-intelligent in that it had a singular purpose to accomplish the task the wielder desires most. Instead of putting a "on/off" switch, try making the weapon intelligent, at least enough to make the PC's have constant willpower struggles to maintain their side quests. I don't think its right to take an Artifact with no prior mention in any source of a "trigger" and apply it basically only to PC's. The arguably most powerful artifcat of all time, the Dark Lens, had no such restriction so why should the Scorcher. They were after all, made by the same person (at least as far as anyone knows).
If you feel you need to make the adventure more challenging for a party that possesses such a weapon, remember that balance in Dark Sun is a Myth. The SK's have never been balanced, Rajaat certainly was never balanced. So why can't the PC's have their moment of imbalance. Once they face off against Dregoth, I guarantee what imbalance existed will be corrected immediately. Besides, its not like they will be able to keep the thing once the adventure is over...The SK's would never allow for such a weapon to be held by...insects.
Now I have decided that when I run this adventure, the PC's will get all three rewards- 5,000 gp, 500 slaves, and an estate each (or one big estate all of them can use)- but they will not in any way be allowed to keep the artifacts-the three SK's will take them back from the PC's as part of the agreement. Hamanu will get his sword back, and the other two will each take one of the other items- if the PC's try to back out of this deal they will have the three, all of their armies and templars after them- a situation that no one would be able to survive.
woobyluv- Actually, IIRC one of the options that the PC's have as a reward in the adventure is to keep one of the artifacts. So balance is required in this case.
Now I have decided that when I run this adventure, the PC's will get all three rewards- 5,000 gp, 500 slaves, and an estate each (or one big estate all of them can use)- but they will not in any way be allowed to keep the artifacts-the three SK's will take them back from the PC's as part of the agreement. Hamanu will get his sword back, and the other two will each take one of the other items- if the PC's try to back out of this deal they will have the three, all of their armies and templars after them- a situation that no one would be able to survive.
As I can see from your response you didn't like the idea of PC's keeping such powerful magic/psionics for an extended period either, hehe. As nice as it would be, its just too much to let the PC's keep those items. BTW, one of those artifacts must be returned to Balic at the end (unless the PC's manage to get past the Geas/Quest). Besides, if the PC's are fortunate enough, perhaps they might just manage to loot something off of Dregoth...assuming they do the improbable and kill him. There might be an epic item or two on Dregoth that the PC's could keep in lieu of the artifacts at the end. Of course, if the PC's had the bright idea to take on the 3 SKs after taking out Dregoth, I think I would just have to "cheat" a little and have the PC's die extraordinarily gruesome deaths :evillaugh
Hmm, I'm not so sure that is a good analogy since the Wand of Orcus in the hands of a level 1 should by all rights suck their soul into it since they have no will power to speak of to resist its vast powers. It also says in your own description of it, anything with less than 20HD that comes in contact with it, dies!
Come on woobyluv! Don't play with words.
Anyone struck with the Wand is affected, is what was meant.As to how the Wand works exactly (does it sucks its wielder's soul if a save is loss?) I don't recall, not having checked it in years.
As for the sword being intelligent, it definately isn't, nor are any of the other two swords of Rajaat. What they have is personalities that they press unto their wielders.
This can be expressed by giving them a Personality Description and an Ego Score, but no mind behind it. If you lose your Will save vs. the sword's Ego score, you become imprinted with the personality and must act out in that way.
As for the sword being intelligent, it definately isn't, nor are any of the other two swords of Rajaat. What they have is personalities that they press unto their wielders. This can be expressed by giving them a Personality Description and an Ego Score, but no mind behind it. If you lose your Will save vs. the sword's Ego score, you become imprinted with the personality and must act out in that way.
Actually, the Scorcher kind of works in the exact other way. The wielder presses his personality on the Scorcher, and then the Scorcher acts accordingly.
Now, while I know that no Intelligence score was given in the AD&D descriptions, they describe the sword as having an alignment, a sense of purpose, an awareness of its wielder's actions, and an ability to psionically probe and summon others to fullfill its own purpose (which is: to be used for any purpose). Inanimate, mindless objects can't do that.
I guess you could have the sword mechanically mind probe wielders to recognise purpose, or lack thereof, and then mechanically send psionic summons which automatically only target purposeful individuals, and mechanically "know" when a wielder is not fullfilling its purpose with those mind probes or other psi-like perceptions and then mechanically withdraw its powers... It just seems really weird.
Its a lot easier and it makes a lot more sense, and is more attuned to 3.5 mechanics, to have the object be intelligent, yet describe its personality and purpose exactly as is described in the original texts.
I'd point out that I chose the lowest intelligence scores and communication abilities to show exactly that, even though the item's power could warrant a much stonger intellect and fully developped personality.
Ok. First, while the sword did punch through the defenses, it did punch through. They say the sword rang as if it had hit stone, and when it went through, Rikus yelled in triumphed, so he probably wasn't sure it would get through. A strong sword would still pass through most magical protections simply by hitting in excess of the protections and exceeding DR. Would fit nicely like that. I'd see the scorcher as going straight through naturally.
I remember when I first read that and thought "Stoneskin" or "Ironskin" spell.
Then, book five interfered with my game mechanical thinking.Then, while it did stop on his skin (which fits the description of PAoA), it did at least hurt him a bit, since it drew some blood. So I guess its DR X/Silencer, as Nyt put it, and not simply immunity. I find that a bit weird, but still, I'll talk about that later...
I thought the blood was just flavor. I even incorporated that into my games concerning those two spells.
Actually, the Scorcher kind of works in the exact other way. The wielder presses his personality on the Scorcher, and then the Scorcher acts accordingly.
Now, while I know that no Intelligence score was given in the AD&D descriptions, they describe the sword as having an alignment, a sense of purpose, an awareness of its wielder's actions, and an ability to psionically probe and summon others to fullfill its own purpose (which is: to be used for any purpose). Inanimate, mindless objects can't do that.
I guess you could have the sword mechanically mind probe wielders to recognise purpose, or lack thereof, and then mechanically send psionic summons which automatically only target purposeful individuals, and mechanically "know" when a wielder is not fullfilling its purpose with those mind probes or other psi-like perceptions and then mechanically withdraw its powers... It just seems really weird.
Its a lot easier and it makes a lot more sense, and is more attuned to 3.5 mechanics, to have the object be intelligent, yet describe its personality and purpose exactly as is described in the original texts.
I'd point out that I chose the lowest intelligence scores and communication abilities to show exactly that, even though the item's power could warrant a much stonger intellect and fully developped personality.
We came up with this mechanic awhile ago in order to address this very issue:
Morphic Bane:The Scorcher has a morphic bane property. Its wielder chooses an individual (for example, Wheelock the bard), race (elves) or organization (Veiled Alliance), for which the weapon gains the bane property (+2d6 damage). The morphic bane property can be changed 1/week.