Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Rechan 05-15-07, 10:50 PM	I have a PC in a game who's playing a Warlock. I allowed the power to generate from the corrupting and warped powers of her Aberrant mark. The question is, how do I adjust the other powers? Namely the Resistances and Damage Reduction. These powers are based on the fact these abilities originate from Fiendish heritage. But if it's from the Aberrant mark, what would be appropriate to change the Energy Resistance and Damage Reduction/? to?
DireHawk 05-15-07, 11:46 PM	I think the energy resistance is fine. No need to really change that. But I think it would be completely acceptable and appropiate to change the DR from Cold Iron to Byeshk.
Arryn 05-15-07, 11:46 PM	Why would you need to change them? Although Complete Arcane mentions Fiendish heritage as a possible source for a Warlock's power, that is hardly binding. I don't have the books in front of me, but I seem to remember it saying the powers could also come from the Fey as well. If you want the Warlock's power to come from the Aberrant mark then I don't see why ALL of the powers can't come from it. The nice thing about Aberrant marks is no one really knows how they work. I don't think you need to change a thing.
Rechan 05-15-07, 11:52 PM	I just don't understand Cold Iron relating to Aberrant mutative powers. Byeshk sounds right.
Vharuck 05-16-07, 04:44 PM	I just don't understand Cold Iron relating to Aberrant mutative powers. Byeshk sounds right. "Aberrant" is a word, and doesn't always mean the aberration creature type. Aberrant dragonmarks are more often associated with the dragon Khyber, the progenator of fiends and hags (and the occassional aberration). It wouldn't be a stretch to say both the warlock's powers and his mark are "gifts of Khyber."
Belabras 05-16-07, 06:23 PM	"Aberrant" is a word, and doesn't always mean the aberration creature type. Aberrant dragonmarks are more often associated with the dragon Khyber, the progenator of fiends and hags (and the occassional aberration). It wouldn't be a stretch to say both the warlock's powers and his mark are "gifts of Khyber." The Mark of Khyber feat in Dragonmarked would seem to indicate otherwise.
Salathiel 05-16-07, 10:46 PM	The Mark of Khyber feat in Dragonmarked would seem to indicate otherwise. Umm... Which feat would that be, again? There's a Mark of Xoriat feat and a Ward of Khyber feat, but I don't see Mark of Khyber. Anyway, I don't see anything that specifically contradicts the interpretation that aberrant marks come from Khyber. In fact, this Dragonshard article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ebds/20070416a) directly implies that very idea. Rechan, if you don't have Dragonmarked, you can find the abbreviated list of feats in that book here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20061106a&page=3). -Sal
Belabras 05-16-07, 10:51 PM	Yes, you are right, Mark of Xoriat. The one that gives the character DR Byeshk, which was the whole point. Which was why I brought it up in the first place - the question being whether to change the DR from Cold Iron to Byeshk.
taski 05-17-07, 02:13 AM	I don't know about DR/byeshk. In my mind, there is no particular connection between aberrant marks and Xoriat, aside from that one feat. There's also the Mark of Vermin feat, but that doesn't mean all aberrant marks have a special connection with bugs. *shrug* I might consider DR/good, myself. Khyber's direct progeny, the rakshasas, have DR/good or piercing. I think DR/piercing would be a lame trade from /cold iron, but DR/good would still be useful. Even if your warlock never fights good guys, that doesn't mean her enemies can't pick up and use "good" weapons... :devil:
Shady314 05-17-07, 06:38 AM	Khyber marks in superstition/mythology/etc. are tied to Khyber. Dragonmarks are tied to Eberron. Siberys marks are tied to Siberys. Don't believe me? Open the ECS and see which dragonmark items use which dragonshards. :) Khyber is more tied to fiends than aberrations. It just happens to be where a lot got locked away by the gatekeepers. Nothing need be changed for Warlocks. Changing mechanics to match flavor is usually a bad idea. You change fluff to match mechanics. If you want a Warlock's powers to be tied to Xoriat and aberrations and have Dr/byeshk instead so be it. But that's not "normal." Which is why it takes a feat to do it canonically.
DireHawk 05-17-07, 10:36 AM	Khyber marks in superstition/mythology/etc. are tied to Khyber. Dragonmarks are tied to Eberron. Siberys marks are tied to Siberys. Don't believe me? Open the ECS and see which dragonmark items use which dragonshards. :) Khyber is more tied to fiends than aberrations. It just happens to be where a lot got locked away by the gatekeepers. Nothing need be changed for Warlocks. Changing mechanics to match flavor is usually a bad idea. You change fluff to match mechanics. If you want a Warlock's powers to be tied to Xoriat and aberrations and have Dr/byeshk instead so be it. But that's not "normal." Which is why it takes a feat to do it canonically. But it's not like he's asking for anything he doesn't normally get. He's making a 1-1 trade, cold iron for byeshk. Sure, there's a feat, Mark of Xoriat, which grants DR/Byeshk. But that's for characters that don't normally have DR. A warlock gets it naturally. He's not asking for DR / -, and he's not asking for DR/ Byeshk and Good and Slashing or whatever. People can, and should change mechanics in minor ways to suit their character ideas better. If it's a 1-1 change, then it remains balanced. In fact, given the propensity for adventurers to head into Khyber and fight aberrants in Eberron, the player is probably making himself weaker because byeshk weapons would be more common than cold iron, an already rare weapon type which is made even more rare because people don't want to spend the extra gold to enchant it.
Harliquinn 05-17-07, 12:20 PM	The only problem with allowing bypassing with Byeshk is that Byeshk is much more expensive, rare, and useful than Cold Iron.
Shady314 05-17-07, 09:17 PM	But it's not like he's asking for anything he doesn't normally get. He normally gets DR/byeshk? :rolleyes: Please form a cogent argument. He's making a 1-1 trade, cold iron for byeshk.That's not 1-1. DR is not inherently equal to every other DR. How about just DR/-? That's 1-1 right? Sure, there's a feat, Mark of Xoriat, which grants DR/Byeshk. But that's for characters that don't normally have DR. A warlock gets it naturally. Yes he naturally gets DR/Cold Iron. :rolleyes: It's not for characters that don't have DR it's for characters that want DR 5/Byeshk. If a warlock took it he'd be protected by it when attacked with cold iron weapons... Still useful. He's not asking for DR / -, and he's not asking for DR/ Byeshk and Good and Slashing or whatever.Oh but I thought DR for another DR was just a 1-1 trade? :rolleyes: People can, and should change mechanics in minor ways to suit their character ideas better. No they shouldn't. If it's a 1-1 change, then it remains balanced. In fact, given the propensity for adventurers to head into Khyber and fight aberrants in Eberron, ?? Huh ?? Not in my Eberron. Khyber jaunts aren't "common" and I rarely use aberrations. Don't argue unknown campaign preferences. the player is probably making himself weaker because byeshk weapons would be more common than cold iron, ??? Are you suggesting when the player heads down into Khyber to fight aberrations the aberrations will be wielding byeshk weapons ??? I highly doubt that. an already rare weapon type which is made even more rare because people don't want to spend the extra gold to enchant it. Byeshk is not common in Eberron. Byeshk is especially not common when people expecting him to have DR/Cold Iron attack him with Cold Iron weapons instead of Byeshk. I don't give my NPCs OOC knowledge. If a smart capable enemy discovered warlock's have a weakness to cold iron they'd attack with cold iron and discover to their horror he's not like a regular warlock. That's an advantage. Anyways the real issue is the spurious logic. My powers come from my aberrant mark which is not tied in any official way to Aberrations but he gains the DR of aberrations? No. And get over the feat. It says "the powers of your mark have been WARPED (aka as changed! as in not the way a Khyber mark usually is) by EXPOSURE (exposure: NOT innate connection) to the lingering horrors of Xoriat. It doesn't support your argument.
Shady314 05-17-07, 09:36 PM	The only problem with allowing bypassing with Byeshk is that Byeshk is much more expensive, rare, and useful than Cold Iron. I'm agreeing with you but also expanding on the thinking. Byeshk is more expensive only if you never intend to enchant the weapon. If the weapon is going to be enchanted then cold iron is a bit pricier. If we just look at unenchanted masterwork weapons than you're absolutely right. Byeshk is quite a bit more expensive. And thus far less common. Especially since as far as I know cold iron just means it's forged at a low tempterature. Byeshk can only be found on two mountain ranges bordering Droaam. Byeshk is popular in bludgeoning weapons since it confers a +1 enhancement to damage but this doesn't stack with magical enchantments so once you take a +1 cold iron mace and a +1 byeshk mace they're pretty much equal. (The CI one cost a few hundred gp more) And if you can afford byeshk you can probably afford to get it enchanted whereas someone could afford a CI weapon and not have the means to also get it enchanted. Thus making CI a more common material to find. Also byeshk is such a specialized material that a byeshk weapon is almost certainly specialized towards killing aberrations. Thus you might fight an enemy with a Cold Iron +2 greatsword with Bane:Human but an enemy with a Byeshk weapon is more than likely wielding a +2 Greatclub with Bane:Aberration and thus less dangerous to a human warlock. And also far more likely to be out fighting aberrations than human warlocks. A nice advantage for those with DR/byeshk that people don't expect to have DR/byeshk. Byeshk is harder and stronger than CI but also weighs more and adds DC to the crafting. They would almost be equal if Byeshk were not so much rarer than CI. This makes DR/byeshk a much preferable alternative to DR/CI.
Vharuck 05-17-07, 11:14 PM	:rolleyes: Wow, that got old fast. Anyways, DR/cold iron is not equivalent to DR/-, but it can be equivalent in power to another DR. I know, imagine that. You're wrong. I bet this is a rare event :rolleyes:.
Shady314 05-17-07, 11:39 PM	Wow, that got old fast. Three rolled eyes got old fast? Patience is a virtue. Anyways, DR/cold iron is not equivalent to DR/-, but it can be equivalent in power to another DR. SURE. CAN BE. But not in this case. Think of it this way. If I have my PCs fight a daelkyr and just decide to switch it's DR because of some minor fluff reason and they come in with byeshk weapons only to discover they don't work is that all equal? One DR material is as good as another apparently yes? Even if they somehow find out this daelkyr has DR/CI what about the aberrations they fight to get to the daelkyr that still have DR/byeshk? Now they need two seperate weapons. All materials are not created equal. For example DR/Adamantine is useful at low levels but at high levels most fighters have an adamantine weapon. I know, imagine that. You're wrong. I bet this is a rare event :rolleyes:. I can accept when I'm wrong. If you search through the forums (I don't really expect you to) you can find posts where I have been and have even apologized. Of course that is a very rare event. Am I wrong just because you say so? You didn't bother to form a single sentence of argument. You just claimed I was wrong. At least I bothered to actually form an argument to support my statements. Imagine that I'm not just going to take your word for it. :rolleyes:
Rechan 05-18-07, 03:32 AM	Gentlemen. There is no reason for such snark. In general, my objection to the cold iron is simply this: Cold iron has been expressed as a weakness to two entities: fey and fiends. If the warlock's origins is not derivative of either of the above, then I don't think Cold Iron would necessarily be an appropriate thing to have DR against. Off the top of my head I could say that it would be DR/Silver. Silver is, mythologically speaking, associated with purity. And an aberrant mark is definitely an impurity when one considers the natural bloodlines of the Houses.
Shady314 05-18-07, 04:46 AM	Aberrant marks are tied to Khyber(the Child of Khyber PRC anyone?) who IS tied to fiends. Khyber is supposedly the creator of rakshasa's and hags specifically even. So I don't know where the idea is coming from that aberrant marks are more tied to aberrations than fiends. Unless you WANT that to be the case which is fine. No point arguing houserules. Changing the DR will be an advantage for the player though. Smart enemies that know anything about warlocks will attack with cold iron weapons and be in for a rude surprise. By silver do you mean alchemical silver? That's another advantage for the player. Even when the alchemical silver bypasses the DR it will be doing -1 damage. Not saying these are huge advantages but advantages nonetheless that I'm not seeing the fluff for.
Rechan 05-18-07, 05:33 AM	I am curious how the marks are tied to Khyber. I mean, what is the influence of Khyber to make the marks? Or is this more along the lines of: Syberis marks are from Syberis, Dragonmarks are from Eberron, Aberrants represent Khyber?
Shady314 05-18-07, 06:11 AM	I am curious how the marks are tied to Khyber. I mean, what is the influence of Khyber to make the marks? Or is this more along the lines of: Syberis marks are from Syberis, Dragonmarks are from Eberron, Aberrants represent Khyber? The second paragraph. But that's like asking how Syberis makes the marks for Heirs of Siberys or is tied to them? Who knows but the progenitor wyrms? Did a mindflayer give this character her dragonmark? If not then where's the tie to aberrations coming from? And it's not just superstition and mythology we're talking about. Where aberrant marks are actually called Khyber marks. Eberron shards are used and needed in dragonmark focus items that empower owners of regular dragonmarks. Siberys marks are not just used but NEEDED in items that empower Siberys marks. And where do those shards come from? Eberron shards literally come from the ground of Eberron and Siberys shards literally fall from the sky/Siberys. We haven't seen any items to empower aberrant marks yet but I feel confident they'll use Khyber shards. And Khyber shards come from Khyber. We have Keith Baker's Child of Khyber class. A class that is the equivalent of DM heir for aberrant marks. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ebds/20070416a it even requires a non-good alignment which is pretty shocking from KB. Khyber dragonshards come from khyber and are sometimes called demonstones. Most of it is right in the ECS and the rest is in Dragonmarked. The parallels are clear and the ONLY parallel I can think of to aberrations are that the Gatekeeper's imprisoned the forces of Xoriat in Khyber. Oh and the Eberron Expanded article that said maybe you could use aberrant marks as a substitute for the aberrant blood feat. But EE articles aren't canon. Only Dragonshards are.
Rechan 05-18-07, 12:38 PM	I was just going with Bysehk because a warlock not of Fiends, but of a mutated magic brought on by a mutated mark seemed alien enough to warrant Bysehk, not that it was an Aberration per the Aberration subtype. :) But you've made a convincing case. Cold iron it is. ;)
gelalshawr 05-18-07, 05:04 PM	I've heard several people claim that aberrant marks are tied to Khyber, however, the first aberrant marks were simply caused by mixing bloodlines, they were first seen on the children of two dragonmarked people who had different marks, and were also one of the major causes of the war of the mark.
Shady314 05-18-07, 07:27 PM	I've heard several people claim that aberrant marks are tied to Khyber, however, the first aberrant marks were simply caused by mixing bloodlines, they were first seen on the children of two dragonmarked people who had different marks, and were also one of the major causes of the war of the mark. Is it stated in any book somewhere that the definitive first aberrant mark was from a mixed bloodline? I don't remember that anywhere so if you could find the pg. # I'd love to read it. Anyways aberrant marks can appear spontaneously on any race capable of having a dragonmark BUT (and here's the interesting part) don't need to have any kind of ancestral tie to a Dragonmark house. Mixing bloods gives you a much better chance at creating an aberrant mark (better than just waiting for it to pop up on any random commoner at least) but it isn't necessary. So I'm not sure if you were claiming all aberrant marks must come from the children of mixed mark families but that is not the case. Re-read the ECS and Dragonmarked. The mythology and certain mechanics (mainly the shards but also the fact almost all aberrant marks only cast damage dealing spells.) all point to idea aberrant marks are tied to Khyber. Just as Dragonmarks are tied to Eberron and Sibery's marks are tied to Siberys.
Rechan 05-18-07, 07:38 PM	Re-read the ECS and Dragonmarked. The mythology and certain mechanics (mainly the shards but also the fact almost all aberrant marks only cast damage dealing spells.) all point to idea aberrant marks are tied to Khyber. Just as Dragonmarks are tied to Eberron and Sibery's marks are tied to Siberys. Not quite almost all do damage. In fact, on page 47 of the ECS, the only spells that did damage on the Aberrant Mark list are Inflict Light Wounds, Burning Hands or Chill Touch. The rest are non-damage spells. And the Lesser Aberrant Mark from the Dragonmark book, 7 of the listed spells do no damage (either HP or Statwise) at all.
Shady314 05-18-07, 08:19 PM	Not quite almost all do damage. In fact, on page 47 of the ECS, the only spells that did damage on the Aberrant Mark list are Inflict Light Wounds, Burning Hands or Chill Touch. The rest are non-damage spells. And the Lesser Aberrant Mark from the Dragonmark book, 7 of the listed spells do no damage (either HP or Statwise) at all. :) I stand corrected then. My apologies. I should have said the marks lend themselves to negatively affecting people. The spells do all have a negative slant. Rage may actually be quite a boon to a fighter but a supernatural power to fly into a rage or see in total darkness would probably be more closely related to the things Khyber is connected to. Darkness, anger etc. And then there are the mental whammy spells that may not deal damage but scare(the spell) the hell out of you or suggestion which alters your mind. Yeah there are some odd ball ones though. Tenser's Floating Disk? If you did develop an aberrant mark wouldn't that one almost make you feel ripped off? All the persecution none of the kewlness.
Rechan 05-18-07, 09:02 PM	Indeed. :) THat one also made me scratch my head.
gelalshawr 05-18-07, 09:19 PM	Is it stated in any book somewhere that the definitive first aberrant mark was from a mixed bloodline? I don't remember that anywhere so if you could find the pg. # I'd love to read it. Anyways aberrant marks can appear spontaneously on any race capable of having a dragonmark BUT (and here's the interesting part) don't need to have any kind of ancestral tie to a Dragonmark house. Mixing bloods gives you a much better chance at creating an aberrant mark (better than just waiting for it to pop up on any random commoner at least) but it isn't necessary. So I'm not sure if you were claiming all aberrant marks must come from the children of mixed mark families but that is not the case. Re-read the ECS and Dragonmarked. The mythology and certain mechanics (mainly the shards but also the fact almost all aberrant marks only cast damage dealing spells.) all point to idea aberrant marks are tied to Khyber. Just as Dragonmarks are tied to Eberron and Sibery's marks are tied to Siberys. No I was not claiming that all aberrant marks are from mixed bloodlines, merely that not all aberrant marks were tied to Khyber either and I do not have a definitive statement that the first mark was because of mixed bloodlines, but they were either not seen before the bloodlines started mixing (possibly because that's when the dragonmarks started appearing in the first place) or simply not remarked upon until it was seen that mixing bloodlines had a high probability of creating them. really, all I was saying, is that there are other souces of aberrant dragonmarks besides exposure to Xoriat or Khyber
tallric_kruush 05-19-07, 12:34 PM	Throwing in my two cents on the DR issue: it all depends on the character concept. I think DR/Cold Iron still makes perfect sense for a Warlock with an Aberrant Mark. The major property of Cold Iron is its inherently "unmagical" nature. That's why it damages fey, for instance. A Warlock with no ties to fiends whatsoever would simply be an inherently magical being. DR/Cold Iron makes perfect sense. Now if you want the 'mark and his Warlock abilities to stem from some other specific planar or ancestral ties (such as Xoriat, Khyber, etc...), then maybe you tamper with the DR as given. Otherwise, why change it?? I think DR/Cold Iron is perfect fluff-wise, and it's balanced rules-wise.
DireHawk 05-20-07, 05:14 AM	He normally gets DR/byeshk? :rolleyes: Please form a cogent argument. That's not 1-1. DR is not inherently equal to every other DR. How about just DR/-? That's 1-1 right? Yes he naturally gets DR/Cold Iron. :rolleyes: It's not for characters that don't have DR it's for characters that want DR 5/Byeshk. If a warlock took it he'd be protected by it when attacked with cold iron weapons... Still useful. Oh but I thought DR for another DR was just a 1-1 trade? :rolleyes: No they shouldn't. ?? Huh ?? Not in my Eberron. Khyber jaunts aren't "common" and I rarely use aberrations. Don't argue unknown campaign preferences. ??? Are you suggesting when the player heads down into Khyber to fight aberrations the aberrations will be wielding byeshk weapons ??? I highly doubt that. Byeshk is not common in Eberron. Byeshk is especially not common when people expecting him to have DR/Cold Iron attack him with Cold Iron weapons instead of Byeshk. I don't give my NPCs OOC knowledge. If a smart capable enemy discovered warlock's have a weakness to cold iron they'd attack with cold iron and discover to their horror he's not like a regular warlock. That's an advantage. Anyways the real issue is the spurious logic. My powers come from my aberrant mark which is not tied in any official way to Aberrations but he gains the DR of aberrations? No. And get over the feat. It says "the powers of your mark have been WARPED (aka as changed! as in not the way a Khyber mark usually is) by EXPOSURE (exposure: NOT innate connection) to the lingering horrors of Xoriat. It doesn't support your argument. Regardless of how you want to twist my words to make your logic seem superior, the fact is this: Either you've never actually DM'ed a game, you don't know what D&D is about, you've never played with players that like to think outside the box and go away from the norm, or a some combination of these. DM's are not supposed to be the ultimate rules lawyers, and even though they tend to be the main adjudicators, their main job is provide a storyline and to ensure everyone has a fun time. If this means changing DR of one type for another that is at least almost equivalent (argue all you want, byeshk and cold iron are not THAT different compared to DR / - or hardness) then so be it. If you honestly hold all of your players to a standard they don't wish to participate in, you will quickly find yourself without a game. If you are unwilling to bend the rules once in a while, you can cause imagination to stagnate, and you can dishearten the players who have their own ideas and goals that (this may come as a shock to you) differ from your own. Balance is more than just simple mechanics, its about game play and the amount of fun it generates for everyone. Yes, you have to keep an eye on it so that one player doesn't outshine another, but this is why good DMs are so hard to find, and why so few are willing to take the job. So go ahead and sit there on your delusional throne of RAW, shady, because I guarantee it's a lonely place. Sorry to everyone else who found that off-topic. But as I said before, I see no reason a warlock player cannot substitute DR/Cold Iron for DR/Byeshk, especially if he's changing the entire flavor of the class to meet his own ideas and he;s willing to provide his own creative insights.
Shady314 05-20-07, 06:57 AM	Yep I am the worst DM in the world because I disagree with you. Pehaps you are the terrible DM? You are unable to take criticism apparently. :rolleyes: I "twisted" your words? All I did was quote them. I see you seem to be one of those "you must let the players do whatever they want or you'll stifle their precious little imaginations" people. :rofl: Some might say limits are a good thing and roleplaying the fluff not the mechanics is better. (Im also cheap and don't buy every DnD book ever published) Of course all those people are terrible DMs. Though I'm not sure where I argued from a RAW standpoint it shouldn't be allowed? At no point did I say "That's not allowed by the rules so you can't do that!" I said my main beef with it was that the logic of the argument was spurious. Aberrant marks aren't officially tied to aberrations so why should the DR change to match aberrations? UNLESS the OP had or wanted to change aberrant marks around. I also pointed out unexpected DR's are beneficial. If you trick your party into thinking they are going to fight a white dragon and it turns out to be an albino red dragon that's not equal. And that cold iron is a more readily available material for enemies to acquire whereas byeshk is not. These are all true statements and a DM should take everything into account before making a final decision. And the OP eventually agreed! But yes I'm the one on a high horse. Of course I'm not the one saying things like you don't know what D&D is about PS He was NOT changing the whole flavor of the class. Edymnion's Silver Flame Warlock is completely changing the flavor of a class. And kewl btw. This was a minor tweak.
Wraith428 05-22-07, 05:01 PM	In Dragon 332 there is an article by Keith "the Man" Baker in which he suggest that Aberrant inspired warlocks might get DR/Byshek instead of Cold Iron. The article is on the Cult of the Dragon Below. Check it out. Wraith428
Vharuck 05-22-07, 05:30 PM	In Dragon 332 there is an article by Keith "the Man" Baker in which he suggest that Aberrant inspired warlocks might get DR/Byshek instead of Cold Iron. The article is on the Cult of the Dragon Below. Check it out. Wraith428 I don't know about everyone else, but this pretty much ends the argument for me. :D