Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Edymnion 05-12-07, 02:39 PM	I still have my Warforged character that uses a Goliath Greathammer as his signature weapon, and the byeshk thread made me think of him, and what I should eventually aim to make his hammer out of. Byeshk, or Adamantine? Byeshk is more useful in combat with it's +1 to damage rolls with bludgeoning weapons, and every point of damage is another point closer to forcing Massive Damage saves with every swing. Adamantine is better for non-combat though, as it lets him easily shatter statues, walls, doors, or anything else that gets in his way, reinforcing the idea of him being a super strong unstoppable force. Which would you suggest?
tallric_kruush 05-12-07, 03:07 PM	I would definitely go with Byeshk if I were going to be fighting a lot of Aberrations. Otherwise, Adamantine is the better choice due to it's broader uses, as you've pointed out. As a side point (though I don't want to clutter your thread), I houseruled the +1 damage to all two-handed weapons (but not double-weapons), in addition to the byeshk RAW. A greatsword or greataxe would benefit from the increased mass everybit as much as a maul or hammer. Plus, the sword seemed a more common weapon among the Dhakaan than the hammer, but that's purely opinion/conjecture. (Geth wielded a nice Dhakaani byeshk sword). I didn't want to make byeshk, a rare metal at best, the material of choice in Eberron, thus the houserule only to two-handed weapons. Your thoughts??
UnderworldLord 05-12-07, 06:04 PM	Remember Edy, you can sunder in combat too. Its a favored tactic of a friend of mines, and worked quite well in our last campaign... except for that the DM didn't really want us to win, so he pretty much made the guys we fought continually pull out new weapons like some sort of D&D James Bond. Rant aside, both materials have their own advantages. If you are going for dfmd as often as possible, grab power attack and maybe leap attack, and make it byshek. If you want a weapon few will be able to sunder, and that can destroy enemy weapons often, get adamantine. It also requires you to consider what types of enemies you seek out. If its a lot of natural weapon users, or people who use thrown/ranged weapons, go with the byshek, as you won't be sundering much.
Edymnion 05-12-07, 06:26 PM	Remember Edy, you can sunder in combat too. Its a favored tactic of a friend of mines, and worked quite well in our last campaign... Oh, I know. I played the character for a short time in an online game. DM put us up against a bunch of valenar archers. Loads of hitpoints, so what do I do? Throw him a curveball, charge in, and sunder the bows. Bows are easy to sunder to begin with. The fact that its being done by a charging WF with a two handed weapon that gets bonuses to sunder means I reduced the entire encounter to a bunch of prisoners in just a couple of rounds. Run up, smash bow. Move on to next archer. Thats the thing when you marry your weapon, somebody sunders it, and you're worthless. Like archers. :D
Vharuck 05-12-07, 06:32 PM	Go with adamantine. Smash down walls. After bursting through a wall, stand in the middle of the rubble and settling dust, and belt out a load, "OH YEAH!"
Edymnion 05-12-07, 06:34 PM	Go with adamantine. Smash down walls. After bursting through a wall, stand in the middle of the rubble and settling dust, and belt out a load, "OH YEAH!"I'd have to paint myself red and put on a LOT of weight, but thats doable. ;)
Cifer 05-12-07, 08:00 PM	I'd have to paint myself red Pay an artificer to do it. and put on a LOT of weight That might be harder... To come back to the topic, I'd suggest using an adamantine hammer. They're more versatile (as versatile as a damn big club can be...), they're damn hard to sunder and they are worse only against aberrations - and if one of those really has too much DR, well, Byeshk isn't that pricy compared to adamantine. Just get a back-up hammer. I'm not quite sure where it was, but I've seen a +2 enchantment floating around that can turn your weapon into any metal you want - too pricy for your main weapon that is already enchanted to the hilt but absolutely ok for higher levels when used on your backup.
UnderworldLord 05-12-07, 08:15 PM	You could always have to hammers, each enchanted and crafted differently.
Edymnion 05-12-07, 08:32 PM	and they are worse only against aberrationsActually, they are worse against pretty much all oponents, as the do less damage across the board.You could always have to hammers, each enchanted and crafted differently.No thank you, I refuse to run around with a golfclub bag full of weapons. Anyway, we're talking about a goliath greathammer. The stupid thing is bigger than most party members, and actually weighs more than some of them to boot. Carrying around two of them is just not gonna happen. I mean, how many fighters do you see running around with 2-3 greatswords strapped to their backs? Heh, and if you say any number greater than 0, the powergamer/munchkin comments will fly. ;)
Runepriest 05-12-07, 08:36 PM	I'm not quite sure where it was, but I've seen a +2 enchantment floating around that can turn your weapon into any metal you want - too pricy for your main weapon that is already enchanted to the hilt but absolutely ok for higher levels when used on your backup. Metaline, MIC. One of the best abilities in my opinion. I'm unsure of it's book of origin though. You can pretty much bypass any DR in the game with it.
UnderworldLord 05-12-07, 10:05 PM	Actually, they are worse against pretty much all oponents, as the do less damage across the board.No thank you, I refuse to run around with a golfclub bag full of weapons. Anyway, we're talking about a goliath greathammer. The stupid thing is bigger than most party members, and actually weighs more than some of them to boot. Carrying around two of them is just not gonna happen. I mean, how many fighters do you see running around with 2-3 greatswords strapped to their backs? Heh, and if you say any number greater than 0, the powergamer/munchkin comments will fly. ;) First: I said HAVE not CARRY, :) . I know about the goliath greathammer. I'm well aware of its size and weight. Carrying around two of them could happen, if you are a large size creature, which lets remember you are supposed to be to use the correctly sized one. I generally ignore oversized weapon fighting cheese, but if you choose to use that, go ahead. As far as fighters with 2 greatswords, I know one that did carry two fullblades. A dwarf *grumbles about damn dwarves* fighter. One of the two was brilliant energy, and thus much lighter, but that is beside the point. He paid handsomely for both. I fail to see how having two of a weapon makes you a power gamer, as you can't wield both, and you obviously paid for (or stole) both.
Breeder 05-12-07, 10:31 PM	Most large hammers I've seen typically have two heads. Have one Byeshk, and the other side Adamantine. Pay out the wazzoo for both materials. I don't think you would still have to enchant both side differently though as it isn't technically a double weapon.
UnderworldLord 05-12-07, 10:57 PM	Innovative and unique, but I don't know if you can do that really. I mean, would the increased weight of the byshek give it enough to give it the bonus that byshek normally confers? Or just make it unweildly by being slightly heavier than normal on its one side? Now it would be an interesting feat of metallurgy to mix the two metals. That could prove interesting, but I don't think it'd be particularly viable.
Breeder 05-12-07, 11:10 PM	Adamant Byeshk is a blend of Adamantine and Byeshk. It has the coloring of a very dark purple with shiny pink flakes. Weapons have a +1 enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls. Bludgeoning weapons fashioned from it have the natural ability to bypass hardness when sundering weapons or attacking objects, ignoring hardness less than 15. It is so costly that weapons made from adamant byeshk are always of masterwork quality. Weapons made from Adamant Byeshk cost an additional 5,000 gp.
Cifer 05-13-07, 04:50 AM	No thank you, I refuse to run around with a golfclub bag full of weapons. Well, your golfclub bag might simply be a HHH/Bag of Holding - and two weapons suffice if one of them is metalline. I generally ignore oversized weapon fighting cheese, but if you choose to use that, go ahead. Calling it cheese is an affront to any cheesy things out there - it's essentially a lot weaker than some (fighter-available) material in Core.
Edymnion 05-13-07, 09:00 AM	I'm well aware of its size and weight. Carrying around two of them could happen, if you are a large size creature, which lets remember you are supposed to be to use the correctly sized one.Heh, then you don't know greathammers, because the default one printed in the book is for medium sized characters. It also lists Large sized ones, which the Goliaths can use without penalty due to their Powerful Build. :P
WarlockDa 05-13-07, 11:19 AM	Why not use the rules for a two headed weapon, only instead of two seperate heads, it's two seperate sides of the same head. Effectively you don't need the head to be solid adamantine or byeshk, just like silvered weapons it could be merely a coating over the core metal. A new PC design in our group liked the look and concept of Thor's ax from the Ultimates series, one side of the head is an Axe blade, other side is the big hammer. Similar concept here. If you want to hurt abberations, hit with the Byeshk side, ....time to bash a wall,..spin the weapon and smash with the adamantine head.
UnderworldLord 05-13-07, 12:17 PM	Heh, then you don't know greathammers, because the default one printed in the book is for medium sized characters. It also lists Large sized ones, which the Goliaths can use without penalty due to their Powerful Build. :P Uh Edy... why would a race invent something deliberately less than full sized? It is a GOLIATH greathammer, and it was meant to be used by Goliaths, which would wield the full sized LARGE version. Don't get me wrong, I understand using one of medium size, but lets not get the intent wrong: the weapon was meant for use of large sized, or powerfully built creatures. The creators threw on a medium one due to not a whole lot of races having powerful build (two that I know of) and not a whole lot of people (again, that I know off) liking the large races. Cifer: Its not cheese because its powerful. Its cheese because there is no way in hell a goblin is going to wield a normal sized greataxe, but that feat makes it possible. Or two normal sized bastard swords for that matter. Its cheesy for the same reason the bloodstorm blade is cheesy: bad fluff.
Edymnion 05-13-07, 12:44 PM	Uh Edy... why would a race invent something deliberately less than full sized? It is a GOLIATH greathammer, and it was meant to be used by Goliaths, which would wield the full sized LARGE version. Don't get me wrong, I understand using one of medium size, but lets not get the intent wrong: the weapon was meant for use of large sized, or powerfully built creatures. The creators threw on a medium one due to not a whole lot of races having powerful build (two that I know of) and not a whole lot of people (again, that I know off) liking the large races.And lets not forget we're talking about using it in Eberron, which does not have Goliaths in it in the first place. Why would someone make a big warhammer so large nothing short of an ogre could weild it properly? Just because I'm using their weapon doesn't mean I have to import the entire freaking race and culture. Its just a two handed hammer, which should have been in the PHB in the first place.
ChimericalWolf 05-13-07, 01:22 PM	Well, the Byeshk +1 damage doesn't stack with magical enchantment, so unless you're planning on foregoing magic or fighting in a lot of AMFs, I'd go Adamantine.
UnderworldLord 05-13-07, 05:32 PM	And lets not forget we're talking about using it in Eberron, which does not have Goliaths in it in the first place. Why would someone make a big warhammer so large nothing short of an ogre could weild it properly? Just because I'm using their weapon doesn't mean I have to import the entire freaking race and culture. Its just a two handed hammer, which should have been in the PHB in the first place. Unless, like me, you actually use some of the material in those side bars. I know you don't have to import the race/culture just to have the weapon. Though of note, in order to fit it you could rename it the 'Ogre Greathammer' or some such. Anyhow, we've both gotten off topic. I'd say chimericalwolf has given the best reason so far for why adamantine is the superior of the two. Unless you're looking to fight aberrations, or just want that flavor, I would take the adamantine.
Edymnion 05-13-07, 07:49 PM	Unless, like me, you actually use some of the material in those side bars. I know you don't have to import the race/culture just to have the weapon. Though of note, in order to fit it you could rename it the 'Ogre Greathammer' or some such.Or just plain "greathammer". There's no reason at all to include the larger sized one as being any more normal than any other large sized weapon.Anyhow, we've both gotten off topic. I'd say chimericalwolf has given the best reason so far for why adamantine is the superior of the two. Unless you're looking to fight aberrations, or just want that flavor, I would take the adamantine.Yeah, I think you're right.
Cifer 05-13-07, 08:30 PM	Cifer: Its not cheese because its powerful. Its cheese because there is no way in hell a goblin is going to wield a normal sized greataxe, but that feat makes it possible. Or two normal sized bastard swords for that matter. Its cheesy for the same reason the bloodstorm blade is cheesy: bad fluff. On the other hand side, in no way in hell a human is going to throw around big fiery balls and lightning bolts, right? Yes, it tends towards manga and its oversized weapons, but whether that is good or bad is to decide for the individual.
DarkWarriorKarg 05-14-07, 12:20 PM	Adamantine. For the reasons above... Max out your intimidate skill... use it when "power walking" through a freshly-made hole in the wall... "We're sending someone in to negociate!" <Wall comes down, adamantine warforged with adamantine greathammer slowly strides in> "That's the negociator?!" "No... he's what happens if you don't surrender."
Edymnion 05-14-07, 12:26 PM	Yes, it tends towards manga and its oversized weapons, but whether that is good or bad is to decide for the individual.Oh come on Cifer, you've been around long enough to have seen minis. When was the last time you *EVER* saw a mini with a weapon that was correctly scaled? Half the time, the sword is supposed to be a longsword, and its nearly as long as the mini is tall. If anything, the fact that the mini you chose is weilding an axe twice the size of the character should be a more direct correlation to Weild Oversized Weapon than anything you see in anime/manga.Max out your intimidate skill... use it when "power walking" through a freshly-made hole in the wall... "We're sending someone in to negociate!" <Wall comes down, adamantine warforged with adamantine greathammer slowly strides in> "That's the negociator?!" "No... he's what happens if you don't surrender."Heh, I did actually. Trust me, when he asks for you to surrender, he ain't asking, he's telling. Walk up, sunder weapon. Next round, Intimidate and ask them to surrender. If they don't, sunder THEM and walk over to the next guy. Repeat until everyone is dead, or a prisoner. You'd be surprised at how big of a circumstance bonus to that check you can get after the second or third nail gets driven into the ground. ;)
snakebliskan 05-14-07, 01:43 PM	Adamantine; all the way!
Logos7 05-16-07, 12:04 AM	All and All I tend to be more affraid of the things that have dr/adamantine than dr/byshek
Forged_Fury 05-16-07, 12:17 AM	Yeah, Daelkyr are sooooo easy. Although one could beat their DR with a Holy Adamantine weapon. -Forged_Fury
LoneStranger 05-16-07, 07:51 PM	Yeah there's something about Adamantine that just makes it sound like you should go out and punch someone if they don't like it. "What do you think of Adamantine?" "Well it's ok..." *person asking delivers a right hook* "Ow what was that for?" "Being a loser, remember Adamantine is great"
Kreistor2 05-17-07, 09:36 AM	Go with Adamantine for the primary weapon. Have a Byeshk backup, and buy scrolls of Magic Weapon for the Cleric when you have need of switching to it. It'll come out cheaper in the end.
Dragoloth 05-17-07, 11:06 AM	Adamantine's + 1 to hit actually is better than byeshk's +1 dmg. When power attacking with a two handed weapon 1=2, and I know power attack is limited by BaB, but that + 1 to hit is going to help when youpower attack for your full BaB. The better my to hit is the more I will power attack for. My second point is once you get a +1 or better bonus the bonuses from adamantine and byeshk don't stack. This makes adamantines ability to bypass hardness more valueable in the long term. Just my opinion but adamantine just sounds cooler.
bertman4 05-17-07, 01:22 PM	Yeah, Daelkyr are sooooo easy. Although one could beat their DR with a Holy Adamantine weapon. -Forged_Fury Agree. Lame. I would be tempted to houserule that they have DR/Byeshk AND Good, not DR/Byeshk or Good. Bertman
tallric_kruush 05-18-07, 06:27 PM	Adamantine's + 1 to hit actually is better than byeshk's +1 dmg. When power attacking with a two handed weapon 1=2, and I know power attack is limited by BaB, but that + 1 to hit is going to help when youpower attack for your full BaB. The better my to hit is the more I will power attack for. My second point is once you get a +1 or better bonus the bonuses from adamantine and byeshk don't stack. This makes adamantines ability to bypass hardness more valueable in the long term. Just my opinion but adamantine just sounds cooler. Any non-magical Byeshk weapon would be masterwork, and would therefore grant the same non-magical +1 to hit bonus as Adamantine weapons. I do agree in Adamantine's superiority. I think I'd just create a Weapon Augment Crystal to attach to my Adamantine weapon. The Lesser Fiendslayer Crystal allows the wielder to bypass fiendish DR. Maybe an Aberration-Slayer Crystal would have a similar progression, bypassing DR x/Byeshk as its "lesser" ability. I really like the new augment crystals.
Edymnion 05-22-07, 10:00 PM	I think I'd just create a Weapon Augment Crystal to attach to my Adamantine weapon. The Lesser Fiendslayer Crystal allows the wielder to bypass fiendish DR. Maybe an Aberration-Slayer Crystal would have a similar progression, bypassing DR x/Byeshk as its "lesser" ability. I really like the new augment crystals.Gotta love that Materia. ;)
BlindGuardian 05-22-07, 11:03 PM	where do the augment cristals come from? from which book?
Forged_Fury 05-23-07, 08:11 AM	where do the augment cristals come from? from which book? Final Fanta... I mean the Magic Item Compendium. -FF
Cifer 05-23-07, 08:36 AM	That would be the Magic Item Compendium, a boon to every artificer.
gelalshawr 05-23-07, 06:19 PM	So... I'm gonna have to go OT slightly because Edy said something that doesn't make sense. I usually find your posts to be rather opinionated, but backed up very well by facts, however I cannot understand why you would say that Goliaths don't exist in Eberron, when the ECS specifically says anything in base D&D has a place in Eberron. Eberron absolutely has Goliaths, unless you as the DM decide not to use them in your game.
ChimericalWolf 05-23-07, 06:58 PM	when the ECS specifically says anything in base D&D has a place in Eberron. Eberron absolutely has Goliaths, unless you as the DM decide not to use them in your game. ECS says that there is a place for everything. Not that everything is, by default, in. It means that you can change the setting to suit your group's style, not that if your DM denies you something you get to throw a fit. Eberron does not have Goliaths unless you put them there.
tallric_kruush 05-23-07, 07:57 PM	ECS says that there is a place for everything. Not that everything is, by default, in. It means that you can change the setting to suit your group's style, not that if your DM denies you something you get to throw a fit. Eberron does not have Goliaths unless you put them there. Agreed. That statement in the ECS seems to be frequently "read in reverse". WotC wouldn't create a new Campaign Setting and then encourage us not to use any of the non-Eberron supplemental material. Since 3.5 is the standard rule-set across the board, "there is a place for" any of the other supplemental material in Eberron. By default, or canon, the only races in Eberron are those found in the PHB, the four new Eberron races, and drow. I don't think I've forgotten any. You get the point, even if I've left someone out. All the stuff within the Races of... Series, for instance, isn't canon. It is, however, compatible should you as DM choose to include it in your Eberron.
gelalshawr 05-23-07, 08:44 PM	Agreed. That statement in the ECS seems to be frequently "read in reverse". WotC wouldn't create a new Campaign Setting and then encourage us not to use any of the non-Eberron supplemental material. Since 3.5 is the standard rule-set across the board, "there is a place for" any of the other supplemental material in Eberron. By default, or canon, the only races in Eberron are those found in the PHB, the four new Eberron races, and drow. I don't think I've forgotten any. You get the point, even if I've left someone out. All the stuff within the Races of... Series, for instance, isn't canon. It is, however, compatible should you as DM choose to include it in your Eberron. I have to disagree, just because something isn't necessary doesn't mean it's not canon. And truly, it can be read both ways, you could say "Illumians don't exist in Eberron until the DM says they do," but you could just as easily say "Illumians exist in Eberron unless the DM says they don't." There is an equal plausibility for both arguments. From a DM's standpoint, it's usually easier to simply say these things exist unless I say otherwise, instead of deciding you want to add them after the fact and having to come up with a lame excuse as to why they never existed before. but that's all personal preference honestly. There is no rule in any book, that says Goliaths do not exist in Eberron, and that was what I was really trying to say.
Edymnion 05-23-07, 10:03 PM	I cannot understand why you would say that Goliaths don't exist in Eberron, when the ECS specifically says anything in base D&D has a place in Eberron. Eberron absolutely has Goliaths, unless you as the DM decide not to use them in your game.No, you are missreading that line in the ECS. Look at it again, it is a teaser heading for the block of text underneath it. If you read that text, it specifically says the line only applies to the core rules, it does not put everything and the kitchen sink into Eberron by default. At the very most, it can be stretched into "Everything and the kitchen sink has a place it could potentially be shoehorned into", not "Everything written in every book for the rest of time is automatically in Eberron".I have to disagree, just because something isn't necessary doesn't mean it's not canon.Actually, in D&D, it does. For example, nowhere will you find anywhere in any book that says there aren't Klingons in Eberron. Doesn't say there aren't F-22 Raptor fighter jets either. There are a *LOT* of things that are not specifically excluded by the books, primarily because you can't shove an infinite list in a finite book. As far as what is in a setting (any setting) by default, we are limited to only what is specifically said to be there. Although, if you count the sidebars from PGtE, then everything and the kitchen sink is already in the setting, which just majorly sucks.
Dragoloth 05-23-07, 10:24 PM	Sidebars never count thats why they are only sidebars.
Cifer 05-24-07, 12:22 PM	From a DM's standpoint, it's usually easier to simply say these things exist unless I say otherwise, instead of deciding you want to add them after the fact and having to come up with a lame excuse as to why they never existed before. The "lame excuse" would be a simple "They're not exactly numerous - you just never heard of them" or alternatively "Of course they exist. They just were not exactly important to anyone until now". Not really outlandish...
Edymnion 05-24-07, 12:51 PM	The "lame excuse" would be a simple "They're not exactly numerous - you just never heard of them" or alternatively "Of course they exist. They just were not exactly important to anyone until now". Not really outlandish...Which is, IMO, a lame excuse. "Its always been there, you just never noticed the 8 foot tall Goliaths tromping through town before".
Kreistor2 05-24-07, 02:13 PM	No, you are missreading that line in the ECS. Look at it again, it is a teaser heading for the block of text underneath it. If you read that text, it specifically says the line only applies to the core rules, it does not put everything and the kitchen sink into Eberron by default. At the very most, it can be stretched into "Everything and the kitchen sink has a place it could potentially be shoehorned into", not "Everything written in every book for the rest of time is automatically in Eberron" BS. And you know it. How many times has Keith explained himself? And you keep ignoring him. He wrote it himself. I'll quote him again, just for you. I'm quoting the entire thing, in order to provide context. The thread this came from involved someone wanting to force his DM to accept a particular race. . I'm not going to track down one of the many threads where I've discussed this in detail, but the statement made on page 8 of the ECS is "If it exists in D&D, it has a place in Eberron." Not "If it exists in D&D it IS in Eberron." Do you WANT to use aquatic elves? Great. Perhaps they were created by the giants to assist storm giants in underwater activities. Perhaps they "naturally" evolved when a chunk of Xen'drik sunk in the cataclysm. But that doesn't mean you HAVE to use aquatic elves, or that a player can say "Aquatic elves are in the SRD! You have to let me play one!" If it exists in D&D, it should be easy to find a way to work it into Eberron if you want to do so - and that's all that statement means. Read that last sentence again. And again. And again. Anything and everything can be in Eberron. If it exists in DND, not if it exists in the Core Rules. Your interpretation is wrong, Edy, and it always has been. Jump through as many hoops as you want: KB says you're interpreting it wrong. Eberron is intended to include anything any DM wants to include or exclude. We all get to choose for ourselves, and none of us are wrong. The only thing wrong is anyone fundamentally limiting Eberron for everyone else.
Vharuck 05-24-07, 04:01 PM	BS. And you know it. How many times has Keith explained himself? And you keep ignoring him. He wrote it himself. I'll quote him again, just for you. I'm quoting the entire thing, in order to provide context. The thread this came from involved someone wanting to force his DM to accept a particular race. Read that last sentence again. And again. And again. Anything and everything can be in Eberron. If it exists in DND, not if it exists in the Core Rules. Your interpretation is wrong, Edy, and it always has been. Jump through as many hoops as you want: KB says you're interpreting it wrong. Eberron is intended to include anything any DM wants to include or exclude. We all get to choose for ourselves, and none of us are wrong. The only thing wrong is anyone fundamentally limiting Eberron for everyone else. The funny thing is you two share such similar interpretations of that section as to be nigh-indistinguishable, while also being so similar in personality as to be nigh-indistinguishable. And I wouldn't put it past Edy to crave a debate so much that he'd create a puppet poster to get it. :P
Edymnion 05-25-07, 04:57 PM	BS. And you know it. How many times has Keith explained himself? And you keep ignoring him. He wrote it himself. I'll quote him again, just for you.No, you just agreed with me. Eberron has a place you *COULD* put just about anything ever written. That does not mean that it is *AUTOMATICALLY* in the game. Thats the key differance. Its the differance between saying "No, there are no deserts anywhere in the setting, hence there cannot possibly be an <insert desert related thing here>.", saying "Well, there is a big desert over here, which could have <insert desert related thing here> if you just really want to include it.", and saying "Well, there is a desert over here, and every concievable desert related thing every concieved of is in that desert." I mean, really, read what you quoted me saying, and what Keith is saying. "Its not there by default, but you can put it in if you want". Let me quote myself and bold it for you.No, you are missreading that line in the ECS. Look at it again, it is a teaser heading for the block of text underneath it. If you read that text, it specifically says the line only applies to the core rules, it does not put everything and the kitchen sink into Eberron by default. At the very most, it can be stretched into "Everything and the kitchen sink has a place it could potentially be shoehorned into", not "Everything written in every book for the rest of time is automatically in Eberron"See?
gelalshawr 05-25-07, 05:03 PM	Yes Edy, but your original statement that I had a problem with was And lets not forget we're talking about using it in Eberron, which does not have Goliaths in it in the first place. you're trying to say that they don't exist in Eberron, whether some DM wants to put them there or not.
Edymnion 05-25-07, 06:08 PM	you're trying to say that they don't exist in Eberron, whether some DM wants to put them there or not.No, I'm not. Open your ECS and find for me where it says Dwarves come from. Now look up where the homeland for the Shifters is. Now flip through your ECS and tell me where it says the Goliaths are. I never said that a DM could not put them into the game, I said that there were no Goliaths in Eberron in the first place, and there aren't until the DM specifically puts them in. And when the DM specifically modifies the campaign setting to better fit the game that they and their players want to play, you're no longer at the "first place".
gelalshawr 05-25-07, 06:30 PM	No, I'm not. Open your ECS and find for me where it says Dwarves come from. Now look up where the homeland for the Shifters is. Now flip through your ECS and tell me where it says the Goliaths are. I never said that a DM could not put them into the game, I said that there were no Goliaths in Eberron in the first place, and there aren't until the DM specifically puts them in. And when the DM specifically modifies the campaign setting to better fit the game that they and their players want to play, you're no longer at the "first place". ok, open your ECS and find for me where it says Daelkyr half-bloods come from, or windwright captains for that matter, does that mean they don't exist in Eberron "in the first place?" Just because it's not written in the campaign setting doesn't mean it's not there. You're right, the ECS states that in Eberron there is a place for everything that exists in D&D, it does not say that everything in D&D exists in Eberron, however, it doesn't say it doesn't exist either. And don't give me that "it doesn't say there's no F-22's in Eberron" until you find me a canon D&D (not D20) book that has F-22's in it. And anyone that says the Races books are not canon doesn't know what the word means.
Edymnion 05-25-07, 06:39 PM	ok, open your ECS and find for me where it says Daelkyr half-bloods come from, or windwright captains for that matter, does that mean they don't exist in Eberron "in the first place?" <snip> And anyone that says the Races books are not canon doesn't know what the word means.Okay, you're just going out of your way to be argumenative now. You win. You are right and I am wrong. There, now we can all be happy. If you can't tell the differance between a setting specific book that goes out of its way to add to the campaign, and "nothing specifically prohibits it, so it must all be there somewhere", then there really just isn't any point in continuing this.
tallric_kruush 05-25-07, 07:59 PM	Edy, I think I'd quite enjoy playing in one of your "purist" Eberron games. I honestly can't remember the last time I outright disagreed with one of your posts. In fact, I frequently have no need to post if you've already visited a thread. I end up saying, "Oh, Edymnion's already said it. No need to beat the dead horse." It's something that happens often enough to be amusing. I thought I'd share.
Kreistor2 05-25-07, 09:51 PM	I never said that a DM could not put them into the game, I said that there were no Goliaths in Eberron in the first place, and there aren't until the DM specifically puts them in. And when the DM specifically modifies the campaign setting to better fit the game that they and their players want to play, you're no longer at the "first place". Wow, Edy, are you ever splitting hairs. Trying to have your cake and eat it too?. I don't think I've ever seen you admit that sub-races are in Eberron before. Okay, that's provacative by intent. Are they or are they not? I said that there were no Goliaths in Eberron in the first place, and there aren't until the DM specifically puts them in. Here's the problem. You're coming from an exclusionary perspective, rather than inclusionary. You're suggesting that the intent is that everything is turned off unless the DM turns it on. That's only one perspective. It is equally true to approach this from an inclusionary perspective: everything is turned on unless the DM turns it off. Given that Marketing in WotC would demand "Make sure you include everything so that we can sell more books", I can't agree with an exclusionary approach. Your negative perspective also leads to misleading statements like "And lets not forget we're talking about using it in Eberron, which does not have Goliaths in it in the first place." You used an absolute here, not an option. You're trying to pretend that you said, "Eberron... which does not have Goliaths by default." That is not even close to what you really said. You excluded Goliaths absolutely, not optionally.
Edymnion 05-25-07, 10:30 PM	Here's the problem. You're coming from an exclusionary perspective, rather than inclusionary. You're suggesting that the intent is that everything is turned off unless the DM turns it on. That's only one perspective.I have only one thing to say to that. Pun-pun. Any DM that comes at it from an "everything is perfectly A-OK!" deserves the horrible abuses that come with it.Your negative perspective also leads to misleading statements like "And lets not forget we're talking about using it in Eberron, which does not have Goliaths in it in the first place." You used an absolute here, not an option. You're trying to pretend that you said, "Eberron... which does not have Goliaths by default." That is not even close to what you really said. You excluded Goliaths absolutely, not optionally.Then what do you call "in the first place"?
Kreistor2 05-26-07, 12:53 AM	Then what do you call "in the first place"? Are you trying to suggest "And lets not forget we're talking about using it in Eberron, which does not have Goliaths in it in the first place." provides an interpretation where Goliaths are optionally included? "In the first place" in this case indicates that Eberron rules can only be interpreted such that Goliaths are not in the world, where "If it exists in DnD, then it has a place in Eberron" can be interpreted as inclusionary, rather than your need for it to be exclusionary to support your demand. I have only one thing to say to that. Pun-pun. Pun-pun fails. One of the abilities that Pun-Pun uses to get where he is relies on a 1/day ability from one of the forms he switches to being re-used every time he switches to that form. After using that ability once, he then switches back and forth. That 1/day ability? Well, guess what? He already used it today. That the interim form did not have the ability does not "clear off" the use: it was used once today in the first place, and so it's not available for another 24 hours no matter how many times he shifts into that form. Anyway, this is why the DM exists in the first place. Everything has to be sanity checked, not just Pun-pun's specifics. For instance, I created a game breaker by accident, once, totally wihtin the rules, wihtout any Pun-pun over-the-top supernatural stuff. A simple Grell... okay not so simple... grown to Huge (perfectly legal) and then add Fighter levels (allowed by Lords of Madness). Doesn't sound like much, does it? Well, Grells get a lot of attacks, and Weapon Specialization with their tentacles adds +2 damage/hit. An Amulet of Mghty Fists? Same thing. Tic tic tic... booom. Walking time bomb. It doesn't take a Pun-pun to cross the edge of the rules. I'd created something that each individual attack was not so mean, but I hadn't accounted for it having so many of them at such high attack bonus that no one could stand against it for a single round. I should have noticed before it hit the table, but sometimes... well, I caught it in round 1 as I looked at its attack options (trying to decide who to attack... and then I counted the damage each would take and realized a smart Grell would Alpha Strike one, not split, and, well, neither candidate could survive the onslaught even with 20% misses) and was able to tone it down some to avoid the TPK I had created, with the help of the players (I made them aware of the mistake). This is the baby and the bathwater argument. By tossing it all out, you'll be losing some babies. By scoping out the bathwater, sometimes I'll leave part of the baby dirty.
Cifer 05-26-07, 05:56 AM	Now I'm not a native speaker, so I'll not dive into the "what specifics can we squeeze out of 'in the first place'?" jungle. However, I'd rather agree with Edy: Everything that's in the ECS and the Core books is by default in, the rest is by default out until the DM says it's in. This saves the DM from the problem of a player saying "Ok, I'll solve this problem by using obscure spell #32. It's from obscure source #21 and you never forbade that one, nyah, nyah."
ArcTan 05-26-07, 07:16 AM	So... I'm gonna have to go OT slightly because Edy said something that doesn't make sense. I usually find your posts to be rather opinionated, but backed up very well by facts, however I cannot understand why you would say that Goliaths don't exist in Eberron, when the ECS specifically says anything in base D&D has a place in Eberron. Eberron absolutely has Goliaths, unless you as the DM decide not to use them in your game. If you know Edymnion well enough to call him "Edy" then you're blatantly trolling with this post.
Forged_Fury 05-26-07, 08:39 AM	Post #38 and on have had Absolutely (with a Capital A) nothing to do with: a) Hammers b) Byeshk c) Adamantine Can we call it a day guys? -Forged_Fury
Vharuck 05-26-07, 02:20 PM	Edy, you should have your warforged's symbol on your hammer's face, raised so that when you hit something or somebody hard enough, you leave your mark. "This gets my seal of approval!" *SLAM*
tallric_kruush 05-26-07, 04:46 PM	Edy, you should have your warforged's symbol on your hammer's face, raised so that when you hit something or somebody hard enough, you leave your mark. "This gets my seal of approval!" *SLAM* A nice touch, indeed.
Balseraph 05-26-07, 05:52 PM	I agree with the point raised earlier about enhancing weapons. As soon as there is a +1 enhancement bonus on either a adamantine or byeshk weapon, nothing besides the inherent property of the metal matters. Overcoming DR/Byeshk or ignoring hardness less than 20 is the real choice. Also raised above was the "materia" option. The only way I can see it for my game would be to have the augment crystal as a dragonshard. I like to use the materials provided in the Eberron setting before stepping outside them. For example: Cannith Wand Adept removes the existence of the Dual Wand Wielder feat, because the feat is better and if CWA exists, then the feat should not. This is also why I'd be wary of an augment crystal that replaces what byeshk is intended for. That's just me though, your mileage (kilometreage?) may vary.
tallric_kruush 05-26-07, 05:57 PM	Balseraph, you make a nice point about keeping the setting intact. I'd also like to add that your avatar makes think of rum.:)
Edymnion 05-26-07, 06:16 PM	Edy, you should have your warforged's symbol on your hammer's face, raised so that when you hit something or somebody hard enough, you leave your mark. "This gets my seal of approval!" *SLAM*Heh, thats funny. I like it. Especially with an Adamantine hammer. Forget "Killroy Was Here", imagine him just walking along, finding a big boulder, and hitting it with his hammer. Leave a big square dent in the rock with his Ghulra emblem in it. Also raised above was the "materia" option. The only way I can see it for my game would be to have the augment crystal as a dragonshard.Yeah, I would assume it would be a given that pretty much any crystal related stuff that gets ported over would use dragonshards by default. I should actually go get my MIC and re-read the augment crystal section with an eye for my WF.
Cifer 05-27-07, 06:34 AM	Overcoming DR/Byeshk or ignoring hardness less than 20 is the real choice. Don't forget "Overcoming DR/Adamantine". Golems are just such pests, since they're more numerous than Daelkyr and bigger pests than their aberrant minions since you can effectively ignore most of their mind-affecting, stat-draining and other attacks.
Edymnion 05-27-07, 04:06 PM	Don't forget "Overcoming DR/Adamantine". Golems are just such pests, since they're more numerous than Daelkyr and bigger pests than their aberrant minions since you can effectively ignore most of their mind-affecting, stat-draining and other attacks.Yes, and I already plan on having him take Construct Lock as a feat. Definately going for Adamantine.
DragoonDarkfire 05-27-07, 05:27 PM	And then your DM sets you up against a horde of Mindflayers and outsiders from Xoriat. Boy would you be kicking yourself then.
gensuke626 05-27-07, 05:41 PM	I dunno...I can see that as the start of a great story... Adventurers come across a bunch of Xoriat invaders so they run off to get Byeshk...only to find out that all the byeshk has been used up for other weapons in the area, forcing the players to go on a journey to get more Byeshk...
Runepriest 05-27-07, 09:38 PM	Adventurers come across a bunch of Xoriat invaders so they run off to get Byeshk...only to find out that all the byeshk has been used up for other weapons in the area, forcing the players to go on a journey to get more Byeshk... And it turns out all the invaders from Xoriat were the ones who took the Byeshk and hid it.
gensuke626 05-29-07, 06:06 AM	And it turns out all the invaders from Xoriat were the ones who took the Byeshk and hid it. So now the players have to break into a Xoriat equivalent to Fort Knox and sneak out enough Byeshk to craft weapons for themselves... I really wish I didn't just watch part of a Lupin the 3rd movie tonight...Now I'm seeing a Red-jacketed Changeling sneaking out all the Byeshk by himself disguised as a Mindflayer...
Runepriest 05-29-07, 10:56 AM	So now the players have to break into a Xoriat equivalent to Fort Knox and sneak out enough Byeshk to craft weapons for themselves... And are ordered to go to the barracks and end up being forced to march in their army.
ChimericalWolf 05-29-07, 01:48 PM	And are ordered to go to the barracks and end up being forced to march in their army. And have to play a mini-game to avoid being detected?
Runepriest 05-29-07, 08:56 PM	And have to play a mini-game to avoid being detected? Nah, forced to kill innocent bystanders.
gensuke626 05-30-07, 08:28 PM	Nah, forced to kill innocent bystanders. Is that before or after the march? Cause didn't they award you things like Critical Cure Potions if you did the parade manuevers perfectly or something?
Vharuck 05-30-07, 10:46 PM	So now the players have to break into a Xoriat equivalent to Fort Knox and sneak out enough Byeshk to craft weapons for themselves... "We need byeshk to defeat those aberrations! But they have it all!" "I've got an idea! We'll sneak into their base, make friends with their leader, and then sneak out with byeshk! Then we can attack them to get into their base to take out their leader!" "..."
gensuke626 05-30-07, 10:52 PM	Sounds like a plan to me!
ChimericalWolf 05-30-07, 10:55 PM	I have a shorter plan, and that plan is called Elder Mountian Hammer.
yrogerg 05-31-07, 07:40 AM	Yes, and I already plan on having him take Construct Lock as a feat. Definately going for Adamantine. It should be pointed out that Construct Lock isn't really part of Eberron in the first place. Heck, it's not even from an Eberron line book. :P
ChimericalWolf 05-31-07, 02:31 PM	It should be pointed out that Construct Lock isn't really part of Eberron in the first place. Heck, it's not even from an Eberron line book. Oooo, Edy, Space Burn! That's the worst kinda burn. Know why? Cause in space, noone can hear you BURN!!!
Edymnion 05-31-07, 09:53 PM	It should be pointed out that Construct Lock isn't really part of Eberron in the first place. Heck, it's not even from an Eberron line book. :PThats fine, he's taking Weapon Dominance and Melee Weapon Supremecy too, and they're not Eberron material either. :) Heh, and last time I checked, Construct Lock didn't try to say that dwarves can't taste anything, or that all elves are actually deaf and just very good at reading lips. ;)
DragoonDarkfire 06-02-07, 10:43 AM	It should be pointed out that Construct Lock isn't really part of Eberron in the first place. Heck, it's not even from an Eberron line book. :P Uhhh... does that mean you can't take PH feats either? hell I guess Artificer is the only class you can take as well :B