PDA

View Full Version : Are Drow Overpowered?



Aramir21
2009-09-21, 05:23 PM
I was running and campaign that included some extra races outside of the core that I usually use (standard races; Dwarf, Human, Elf, etc.) and allowed these races as player races. However, one of my players insists that Drow are over powered. Any thoughts?

Jade_Tarem
2009-09-21, 05:24 PM
Drow are not overpowered. Remind your player that unbalanced ability scores and SR are more than paid for by the +2 LA.

He does know about LA, right?

Kylarra
2009-09-21, 05:26 PM
If anything, drow are kind of underpowered.

KellKheraptis
2009-09-21, 05:28 PM
Drow are not overpowered. Remind your player that unbalanced ability scores and SR are more than paid for by the +2 LA.

He does know about LA, right?

And going with that, THEY ARE NO WHERE NEAR WORTH TWO LOST CASTER LEVELS, EVER! Now that that's out of my system, they really aren't worth it for the SR either, since that can be had easier than losing the most precious commodity a player has. If LA Buy-off is allowed, however, they are much nicer, though overshadowed by others (i.e. a Saint Aassimar).

Eldariel
2009-09-21, 05:31 PM
Level Adjustment as written is pretty b0rken. As such, races with Level Adjustment tend to be weaker than par without ways to mitigate the adjustment in play. By Core-rules, Drow aren't really good for anything. I'd say they're better at Level Adjustment +1 or so anyways.

Bang
2009-09-21, 05:32 PM
Do you mean 3rd edition?


Not that I know anything about 4th, but that might explain something.

Aramir21
2009-09-21, 05:43 PM
Yes, we are using 3rd edition.

DragoonWraith
2009-09-21, 05:52 PM
Losing two character levels hurts more than what you gain from being a Drow. Period. Even if it was two levels of Monk, or Truenamer. Drow would probably be closer to balanced at LA+1 than LA+2, honestly - they might be a little stronger than they should be (maybe... depends on the class; plenty of classes are still better than Drow), but LA+2 is a lot weaker than they should be.

LA buy-off helps out some. Drow with LA+1 and buy-off are probably a bit strong, since you're getting a fair bit and you can ditch the penalty pretty easily. But at LA+2, buying off the LA is much more expensive and can only happen much later, so I'd say you're still weaker than you ought to be, even after you've gotten rid of all that LA at 9th.

Anyway, as written, no, Drow are not overpowered, not even with buy-off. If you're not using buy-off, I suggest moving them down to LA+1 - though really, I'd strongly discourage any player from taking any LA when there's no buy-off, unless they really know what they're doing.

Starscream
2009-09-21, 05:53 PM
For a +2 LA, Drow are if anything, underpowered. A +1 would be more appropriate.

This is true of a lot of monster races. The Giant pointed out in one comic that Hobgoblins shouldn't even have a +1 for instance. WoTC seems to have underestimated to power of additional class levels, and especially caster levels.

Emy
2009-09-21, 05:54 PM
Drow are definitely underpowered. Use the lesser drow variant from PGtF if you want to have them be available as a player race.

Kylarra
2009-09-21, 05:58 PM
Do you mean 3rd edition?


Not that I know anything about 4th, but that might explain something.Drow aren't really overpowered in 4th iirc. They have some nice tricks, but so do most races.

SparkMandriller
2009-09-21, 06:01 PM
Tell him he should play one so he can prove it.

taltamir
2009-09-21, 06:56 PM
Level Adjustment as written is pretty b0rken. As such, races with Level Adjustment tend to be weaker than par without ways to mitigate the adjustment in play. By Core-rules, Drow aren't really good for anything. I'd say they're better at Level Adjustment +1 or so anyways.

+1

By the raw any race with a level adjustment is vastly underpowered. The bigger the level adjustment, the more underpowered they are... (and the higher level they are, the more it will hurt)

taltamir
2009-09-21, 07:00 PM
I somehow remember someone telling me that LA also reduces XP gain over time... that is, you start out a level 1 drow with level3 party, you end up being MORE than 2 levels behind...
And that is why there is the houserules of "buy out your level adjustment" thing...

Can someone clarify that for me?

Starbuck_II
2009-09-21, 07:06 PM
I somehow remember someone telling me that LA also reduces XP gain over time... that is, you start out a level 1 drow with level3 party, you end up being MORE than 2 levels behind...
And that is why there is the houserules of "buy out your level adjustment" thing...

Can someone clarify that for me?

No LA buyoff is a variant rule not a houserule. It is in a actual book called Uneathed Arcana (SRD d20). http://www.d20srd.org/
Check the link under variant rules.

There are about 5 creatures worth the LA as written. About 7 templates are also worth it.

Gralamin
2009-09-21, 07:11 PM
No LA buyoff is a variant rule not a houserule. It is in a actual book called Uneathed Arcana (SRD d20). http://www.d20srd.org/
Check the link under variant rules.

There are about 5 creatures worth the LA as written. About 7 templates are also worth it.

And even then, most of those are for specialized builds.

DragoonWraith
2009-09-21, 07:18 PM
And even then, most of those are for specialized builds.
And Drow is most certainly not one of them.

quillbreaker
2009-09-21, 07:19 PM
Drow were designed to be the big scary, back when they were added to 1st edition in modules. At the time, I don't recall SR being that common, so intelligent monsters with SR, classes, and SLAs were pretty scary. Add to that that they had very powerful magic items that you couldn't steal because they'd poof in sunlight and generally used poison in great quantities, and they were in a class by themselves.

Drow used intelligently in 1st/2nd were a frequent source of TPKs. They're resistant to the wizard, sneakier than the rogue (cloaks of elvenkind make you nearly undetectable in 1st/2nd), frequently get first strike through stealth, and do enough damage with poison to scare the fighter. It was much less frequent to find a 2nd edition DM that would let you buy/make any old magic item you want, so the gear you possessed tended to be kind of a mixed bag and you couldn't stock up on counters to most of the drow's best tricks. Because they were added in modules and not core books, a lot of old Grognards didn't even *know* what their best tricks were when they first happened to face them in play.

To many people they maintain that reputation to this day, although as many have pointed out, it's really not justified anymore.

GreatWyrmGold
2009-09-21, 07:34 PM
They aren't overpowered. Even at LA +1, there's a few thorns in your side.

1.) The level adjustment.
2.) The constitution penalty. Every class I've seen either is in melee enough that even a few extra hit points are needed, or has a low enough hit die that it needs a few extra hit points to avoid being 1-shoted.
3.) Spell resistance looks great, but if you're in combat and need a spell cast on you when you can't lower it, you are being annoying to your casters.

Still, if drow were at LA +0, it would be as bad as letting wizards cast an unlimited number of spells per day without drain, recharge time, etc.

Shpadoinkle
2009-09-21, 08:06 PM
Agreeing with those who say drow are underpowered for LA+2. I think they're a strong LA+1.

Jade_Tarem
2009-09-21, 08:12 PM
You can make some startlingly good characters based on races with LA. Just... not at low levels. And as someone said, you have to know what you're doing.

The trick is always to play to that monster's strengths. You don't try to make your monster character compete with the other PCs at doing what those PCs do. Earth Elemental? Yeah, you'll be down in HD and BAB, but your fighting strategy should consist of earth glide gimmicks and having an AC far higher than anyone else's can be - not trying to outdo the shock trooper fighter in damage. That will only end in tears. Astral Deva? You're actually better at low levels (assuming you follow the advancment progression from level 1), since you're kind of a turbo-cleric that can fly and hit really hard. Once again, though, you won't stack up that well trying to outdo the real cleric at divine casting or the fighter in tanking. If you begin lagging at higher levels (and have LA buyback), use special abilities and awesome ability scores with a couple levels of paladin to get your hardiness back to where it should be. Stick to what you do best - durable, mobile, divine support - you're more of a super bard than a cleric, and trying to be a cleric will just be frustrating. Earth Elementals and Astral Devas are far from the best monster choices, at that.

That said, the drow are kind of short in the strengths department, as many of the others have pointed out.

taltamir
2009-09-21, 10:43 PM
No LA buyoff is a variant rule not a houserule. It is in a actual book called Uneathed Arcana (SRD d20). http://www.d20srd.org/
Check the link under variant rules.

There are about 5 creatures worth the LA as written. About 7 templates are also worth it.

yes, but does your XP continue to lag? or are you just always LA levels behind?

as for con... Amazingly vital attribute.

SR is really not all that... multiple classes get it for free (like monks) and it actually levels with you. Any spellcaster can cast a spell to give himself SR. And anyone at all can just wear an item that gives SR.

Two levels lost to save an item slot? no thanks...

woodenbandman
2009-09-21, 10:45 PM
Has there ever been a documented circumstance where a race was the kicker for something being overpowered (Racial prestige classes don't count)? Because I would love to see, say, an Ogre be overpowered.

Kylarra
2009-09-21, 10:51 PM
yes, but does your XP continue to lag? or are you just always LA levels behind?

as for con... Amazingly vital attribute.

SR is really not all that... multiple classes get it for free (like monks) and it actually levels with you. Any spellcaster can cast a spell to give himself SR. And anyone at all can just wear an item that gives SR.

Two levels lost to save an item slot? no thanks...You gain exp slightly faster for being lower level, much like how crafters do it. :smallwink:

ericgrau
2009-09-21, 10:55 PM
1e-2e drow stuff

I played in a 3e group and at low levels we still had a healthy fear of drow. At least one of those attacks from knockout poison was bound to take someone down. The wizard had trouble affecting them. And we were scared just because a lot of them were casters, even though they were weaker than no LA casters. That LA doesn't really do much to their CR though, so I can't say how that affects players just from seeing them as monsters.

FMArthur
2009-09-21, 11:20 PM
You gain exp slightly faster for being lower level, much like how crafters do it. :smallwink:

No, that's not true. Characters of the same Effective Character Level advance at the exact same rate, regardless of how much of those levels are distributed to LA and levels with hit dice.

Nevermind, I can see that you were talking about buyoff.

tyckspoon
2009-09-21, 11:27 PM
Nevermind, I can see that you were talking about buyoff.

It's not necessarily true of buyoff either, although it will usually be so. It goes like this: You have LA +1. If you don't have buyoff, you will always be exactly one level behind your LA 0 compatriots. If you do have buyoff and you exercise that option at the earliest possible point, you will instead be 3,000 xp behind. You are, at this point, also one level beyond your LA 0 party, and will pretty much always be somewhere near that same amount of XP behind. However, that portion of XP becomes a smaller and smaller part of your levels as you go forward. Somewhere around 8th level you'll be on the same level as your party most of the time, they'll just move on to 9th a little sooner. It's about the same position as being the guy who had to get Raised while the rest of the party didn't. Meanwhile, the character who didn't/couldn't use buyoff is effectively losing ground in terms of XP- that LA counts for 4k xp, then 5, 6, 7, and so on as the levels become more expensive.

taltamir
2009-09-21, 11:31 PM
You are, at this point, also one level beyond your LA 0 party, and will pretty much always be somewhere near that same amount of XP behind. However, that portion of XP becomes a smaller and smaller part of your levels as you go forward.

That portion of XP might become smaller relatively as you progress, but so would your benefits from that extra "level". Since your innate abilities do NOT progress, they become vestigial and usless... Drow SR is useless when everything you fight beats it automatically and your and your fellow's abilities or items provides several times the SR value.

tyckspoon
2009-09-21, 11:35 PM
That portion of XP might become smaller relatively as you progress, but so would your benefits from that extra "level". Since your innate abilities do NOT progress, they become vestigial and usless... Drow SR is useless when everything you fight beats it automatically and your and your fellow's abilities or items provides several times the SR value.

Right, which is why you buy off the adjustment. It's meant to help you ditch the burden of an LA at about the same time that the benefits you bought with the LA stop being useful. (Drow SR does increase with class levels, it just isn't a very useful ability to start with.)

DragoonWraith
2009-09-22, 12:14 AM
Has there ever been a documented circumstance where a race was the kicker for something being overpowered?
Something Feat intensive + Human.

Which really sucks as an example, since they're LA+0. But I'm sure there are numerous builds which require Human for the Feat.

Kylarra
2009-09-22, 12:17 AM
Something Feat intensive + Human.

Which really sucks as an example, since they're LA+0. But I'm sure there are numerous builds which require Human for the Feat.there's still strongheart halflings for those builds that use dex and don't care about strength!

Shadowbane
2009-09-22, 12:23 AM
Drow might be overpowered if you removed LA entirely, but at +2 LA they are certainly not.

sofawall
2009-09-22, 12:28 AM
Has there ever been a documented circumstance where a race was the kicker for something being overpowered (Racial prestige classes don't count)? Because I would love to see, say, an Ogre be overpowered.

Hulking Hurler. Kobold Sorcerer.

taltamir
2009-09-22, 12:33 AM
Something Feat intensive + Human.

Which really sucks as an example, since they're LA+0. But I'm sure there are numerous builds which require Human for the Feat.

humans are the only overpowered race... but for ANYTHING, not just for feat intensive stuff... Extra feats, extra skillpoints, their CHOICE of favored class (aka, free to multiclass as they wish)...
Humans are so good that playing any other race is a punishment.

Kylarra
2009-09-22, 12:34 AM
humans are the only overpowered race... but for ANYTHING, not just for feat intensive stuff... Extra feats, extra skillpoints, their CHOICE of favored class (aka, free to multiclass as they wish)...
Humans are so good that playing any other race is a punishment.
I don't know if you're being sarcastic or not but ...


ZARUS APPROVES. :smallbiggrin:

DragoonWraith
2009-09-22, 12:40 AM
humans are the only overpowered race... but for ANYTHING, not just for feat intensive stuff... Extra feats, extra skillpoints, their CHOICE of favored class (aka, free to multiclass as they wish)...
Humans are so good that playing any other race is a punishment.
A. Are you saying you actually play with multiclass penalties?! The horror! (I'd never play a game with them in force, ever. I'd find another group; it just does not suit my interests in the slightest to be limited in that fashion, and I disagree with the reasoning behind it existing in the first place.)

B. Extra skillpoints are useful, but rarely make-or-break. Still, fair point.

C. Kobolds. There is nothing that a Kobold can't do better.

taltamir
2009-09-22, 12:45 AM
A. Are you saying you actually play with multiclass penalties?! The horror! (I'd never play a game with them in force, ever. I'd find another group; it just does not suit my interests in the slightest to be limited in that fashion, and I disagree with the reasoning behind it existing in the first place.)

You mean you actually play a game with the races as written? ;p

AllisterH
2009-09-22, 06:51 AM
This may sound silly, but I was always under the impression that WOTC purposely erred on the side of caution when assigning LA.

I mean, is there ANY race that is actually under judged for their official LA number?

DragoonWraith
2009-09-22, 06:56 AM
You mean you actually play a game with the races as written? ;p
Exactly. I'd never play the game as written. There's lots wrong with the game as written. That being on of the most notable ones.

Fractional BAB/Saves are also something I would almost insist on. To do otherwise just makes no sense. I am willing to accept a DM's decision on whether or not one can get the +2 more than once per save (you probably shouldn't, but I won't say no if a DM wants to give it to me).


I mean, is there ANY race that is actually under judged for their official LA number?
Humans, again. There are a few others. Kobolds, if you cheese them enough. The Saint template, for another, one that actually has LA>0.

Kaiyanwang
2009-09-22, 07:03 AM
LA +2? No.

Cool? yes. I'd play one? yes. OP? No.

DragoonWraith
2009-09-22, 07:05 AM
To be perfectly honest, I tossed that out there because I felt like the post needed something other than "well, there's the humans, again" - I've only heard reference to the template, have not actually read it. I have vanishingly little desire to so much as look at BoED. I think I'd rather read BoEF. At least that can be funny.

Ernir
2009-09-22, 07:18 AM
I mean, is there ANY race that is actually under judged for their official LA number?

Feral and Half-Minotaur come to mind.

EDIT: Lolth-touched and Mineral Warrior too? Probably others.

Eldariel
2009-09-22, 07:19 AM
Feral and Half-Minotaur come to mind.

EDIT: Lolth-touched and Mineral Warrior too? Probably others.

All of those are templates. Races, though, not so much...

Zincorium
2009-09-22, 07:33 AM
I'd say Goliath/Half Giant are pretty up there. Warforged and whisper gnome could both be justifiably raised to +1 LA in comparison to the standard.

What WOTC should have gone by is "How bad does something have to be before I would feel sorry for them and give them a free level?", then reverse it and make that the LA +1 benchmark.

Choco
2009-09-22, 09:27 AM
LA itself isn't what kills a lot of these races IMO, it's the racial HD they are forced to start with.... Sure that +2 LA for some race seems like a steal given their uber stats and special abilities (only if you are not a full caster, for obvious reasons) but then you notice they start with 4+ racial HD as well. So for example a Yuan-Ti with one level in any player class is actually ECL 7...

On that note, are there any non-base races out there that are playable even considering their racial HD and LA?

Cyclocone
2009-09-22, 10:01 AM
On that note, are there any non-base races out there that are playable even considering their racial HD and LA?

Thri-Kreen maybe? They're not super awesome (2 RHD +1 LA), but the extra arms are intrinsic to some builds (like thri-kreen dervish).

Offcourse, these days its pretty much replaced by those stupid anthro octopi/squids.:smallsigh:


Black Ethergaunts can do okay too.

chiasaur11
2009-09-22, 10:17 AM
Hulking Hurler. Kobold Sorcerer.

Kobold fallen paladin.

GreatWyrmGold
2009-09-22, 06:10 PM
Drow might be overpowered if you removed LA entirely, but at +2 LA they are certainly not.
Thank you, Shadow Obvious. Elves are, for the most part, strong La+0's. Drow really don't add much in the way of downsides, but offer nice bonuses.


I don't know if you're being sarcastic or not but ...


ZARUS APPROVES. :smallbiggrin:
Seeing as I actually own RoD, I must ask...
Is that good or bad?


To be perfectly honest, I tossed that out there because I felt like the post needed something other than "well, there's the humans, again" - I've only heard reference to the template, have not actually read it. I have vanishingly little desire to so much as look at BoED. I think I'd rather read BoEF. At least that can be funny.
What's wrong with the BoED? And what's the BoEF? Does the F stand for a certain word that shouldn't be said?


On that note, are there any non-base races out there that are playable even considering their racial HD and LA?
I've actualy played several monster races, including (get ready for a shock) gold dragons. Then again, I like playing monks...
(On a side note, I played a gold dragon monk once. With Vow of Poverty.)

Gnaeus
2009-09-22, 06:22 PM
Feral and Half-Minotaur come to mind.

EDIT: Lolth-touched and Mineral Warrior too? Probably others.

Marrulurk?

3 Monstrous humanoid HD. 2d6 sneak attack. 2 bonus feats (point blank and precise shot). Excellent stat array (+2, +6, +4, +0, +6, +4). Breath Weapon. Skill bonuses. Low-Light and Darkvision. A weaker version of blindsense. Fire and Dessication resistance. Death attack and poison use like an assassin.=+1 LA

More than worth 4 class levels in many rogue builds.

taltamir
2009-09-22, 07:09 PM
Marrulurk?

3 Monstrous humanoid HD. 2d6 sneak attack. 2 bonus feats (point blank and precise shot). Excellent stat array (+2, +6, +4, +0, +6, +4). Breath Weapon. Skill bonuses. Low-Light and Darkvision. A weaker version of blindsense. Fire and Dessication resistance. Death attack and poison use like an assassin.=+1 LA

More than worth 4 class levels in many rogue builds.

Most of these would dissipate rather quickly, as they either don't stack (sneak attack?), or will just become obsolete (breath weapon)...
But:
1. They will dominate at lower levels where they get quite a lot for +1 LA
2. +2, +6, +4, +0, +6, +4) are GODLY bonuses for just 1 LA that will last a lifetime. Most creatures get +1 LA for every addition +2 to attribute. They get a whopping 22 bonus points to various attributes at +1 LA. It will help EVERYONE, even a primary int caster (the only stat they don't increase) will benefit from the high dex and con bonuses... I think it is a typo and should have been +10 LA

Good luck finding a DM that allows that though...

DragoonWraith
2009-09-22, 07:10 PM
What's wrong with the BoED? And what's the BoEF? Does the F stand for a certain word that shouldn't be said?
If anything, it's the E - it stands for Book of Erotic Fantasy, a 3rd party supplement. The general sentiment about it (as I've seen) tends to be "well, I'm not really sure you need rules about these things, but if you're going to make a book about sex in D&D, this would be more or less how you should go about it." And it apparently has a lot of things that are completely unrelated, or only tangentially related, to sex, which are reasonably good additions to other games.

And apparently other parts of it are just stupid/hilarious. Which can be fun. And the art is horribad.

Anyway, as for the Book of Exalted Deeds, I'm not a fan of the "alignment set in stone, pure black, white, and exactly 50% gray," and the BoED and BoVD tend to do a lot of that, plus there's things in BoED like "Good!" poison, undead, and mindrape, which is just stupid.

Mongoose87
2009-09-22, 07:11 PM
Thank you, Shadow Obvious. Elves are, for the most part, strong La+0's.

Lol, pardon me?

wadledo
2009-09-22, 07:19 PM
Most of these would dissipate rather quickly, as they either don't stack (sneak attack?), or will just become obsolete (breath weapon)...
But:
1. They will dominate at lower levels where they get quite a lot for +1 LA
2. +2, +6, +4, +0, +6, +4) are GODLY bonuses for just 1 LA that will last a lifetime. Most creatures get +1 LA for every addition +2 to attribute. They get a whopping 22 bonus points to various attributes at +1 LA. It will help EVERYONE, even a primary int caster (the only stat they don't increase) will benefit from the high dex and con bonuses... I think it is a typo and should have been +10 LA

Good luck finding a DM that allows that though...

At 4th level, where they can be first played, they are a bit overpowered, but the fact that they have significantly less skill points than a rogue(which is what they're supposed to be, essentially), as well as the LA itself, make it a decent race overall.
If you wanted to make it completely fair, increase the LA by 1 to a total of +2.

And there is nothing that has a point of LA per +2 stats.
No caster in their right mind would sacrifice 4 (or even 3) levels of spellcasting for some non-associated bonuses.

Akal Saris
2009-09-22, 07:29 PM
Most of these would dissipate rather quickly, as they either don't stack (sneak attack?), or will just become obsolete (breath weapon)...
But:
1. They will dominate at lower levels where they get quite a lot for +1 LA
2. +2, +6, +4, +0, +6, +4) are GODLY bonuses for just 1 LA that will last a lifetime. Most creatures get +1 LA for every addition +2 to attribute. They get a whopping 22 bonus points to various attributes at +1 LA. It will help EVERYONE, even a primary int caster (the only stat they don't increase) will benefit from the high dex and con bonuses... I think it is a typo and should have been +10 LA

Good luck finding a DM that allows that though...

Not at all - you missed it completely, but it includes 3 monstrous HD as well, so a marrulurk wizard will still be casting 1st level spells at ECL 6, and they can't even enter play until 4th level.

Even then, they are best as a rogue race (Death Attack and +2s6 sneak attack), but since their first HD is in their racial class, they don't get the advantage of 4x8+Int skills at 1st level, so they are inferior as skills-based characters to a normal human rogue.

So I'd say they are good as a combat rogue race, but worse than human as a skills rogue, and worse than human at nearly any other race+class combo.

Races with an LA that I think are worth it:
-Marrulurk (for a rogue)
-Centaur (for a mounted charger build)
-Goliath/Half-Giant (grappling, bull rushing, tripping - lots of str+size-based options)
-thri-keen (tricks with multi-weapon fighting)
-giant squid anthro (grappling and general cheesiness - I loathe them so!)

And that's pretty much it. LA favors melee brutes more than spellcasters, if it isn't obvious.

HCL
2009-09-22, 07:38 PM
I might get around to making a race handbook one of these days, but for now I would just say that high elves are a tier 5 (aka bottom of the heap) race hands down. What can they do that another subrace, halfling, or human can't do better? Maybe gimmicky arcane archer builds. Maybe.

Probably the best elf subraces would be Gray Elf and Fire elf for being good wizards (and not much else), and Wild elf for being good archers. But those are still tier 2 races since they are pidgeonholed into a particular couple of builds, while something like a human dwarf or gnome can play a variety of builds well.

taltamir
2009-09-22, 07:43 PM
Not at all - you missed it completely, but it includes 3 monstrous HD as well, so a marrulurk wizard will still be casting 1st level spells at ECL 6, and they can't even enter play until 4th level.

Even then, they are best as a rogue race (Death Attack and +2s6 sneak attack), but since their first HD is in their racial class, they don't get the advantage of 4x8+Int skills at 1st level, so they are inferior as skills-based characters to a normal human rogue.

So I'd say they are good as a combat rogue race, but worse than human as a skills rogue, and worse than human at nearly any other race+class combo.

Races with an LA that I think are worth it:
-Marrulurk (for a rogue)
-Centaur (for a mounted charger build)
-Goliath/Half-Giant (grappling, bull rushing, tripping - lots of str+size-based options)
-thri-keen (tricks with multi-weapon fighting)
-giant squid anthro (grappling and general cheesiness - I loathe them so!)

And that's pretty much it. LA favors melee brutes more than spellcasters, if it isn't obvious.

I didn't miss the 3 monsterous HD, I was just wrong about how LA works.
I thought LA +1 means that, regardless of anything else, if your party is level 10, you can play as a level 9 creature with LA+1.

The way you are putting it makes a lot more sense. Still a good creature, but it commits the cardinal sin of sacrificing caster progression. It will make very nice non casters.

wadledo
2009-09-22, 07:54 PM
I didn't miss the 3 monsterous HD, I was just wrong about how LA works.
I thought LA +1 means that, regardless of anything else, if your party is level 10, you can play as a level 9 creature with LA+1.

The way you are putting it makes a lot more sense. Still a good creature, but it commits the cardinal sin of sacrificing caster progression. It will make very nice non casters.

No, that's how it works.
You have to take the 3 Racial HD and LA, but other than that, you can take whatever classes you want that you qualify for.

GreatWyrmGold
2009-09-22, 08:19 PM
Lol, pardon me?
They get several abilities, and their only downside is -2 Con.
Compare that to gnomes, half-elves, and half-orcs. Those three are half of the races in the PHB. Okay, I guess they're middling. Still.

Also, where's the Marrulurk? (also, sneak attack does stack. Just so you know.)

taltamir
2009-09-22, 08:21 PM
No, that's how it works.
You have to take the 3 Racial HD and LA, but other than that, you can take whatever classes you want that you qualify for.

which makes you a level 6, not a level 9. 3 levels of "monster" aren't "real" levels because they don't STACK with anything and ruin your caster progression / ability progression...
A level 9 wizard with those bonuses is better than a level 10 without, or a level 19 wizard with those bonuses is better than a level 20 without...

wadledo
2009-09-22, 08:25 PM
Yet they still count as levels, so it wouldn't be right to call them anything else.
What's your problem with that?:smallconfused:

Starbuck_II
2009-09-22, 08:28 PM
which makes you a level 6, not a level 9. 3 levels of "monster" aren't "real" levels because they don't STACK with anything and ruin your caster progression / ability progression...
A level 9 wizard with those bonuses is better than a level 10 without, or a level 19 wizard with those bonuses is better than a level 20 without...

Actually RHD do stack with 1/2 Initator level with Martial adepts.
LA are the "non-real" levels, they are empty levels.
RHD are (usually) sucky real levels.

ECL = LA + RHD + Class levels. Although you can trade 1 RHD if you only have one with a class level (which is why humaniods have classes)

Dracons
2009-09-22, 08:36 PM
Also, where's the Marrulurk? (also, sneak attack does stack. Just so you know.)

Sandstorm, page 170

GreatWyrmGold
2009-09-22, 08:41 PM
Sandstorm, page 170

Thanks. Ten character ruleses! I hates them, I does! (Or something like that.)

Ledeas
2009-09-22, 08:44 PM
Do you mean 3rd edition?


Not that I know anything about 4th, but that might explain something.

in 2nd ed, I got rid of the magic abilities and got rid of the sunlight penalty. That made them pretty fair.

Extra stats, -10% to xp, and a free excuse to treat the drow like poop anytime.

The 3rd home rule we played was this. Everyone started off as 3rd and Drow would be 1st. there is your 2 LA. I know it is not 100% right, but...it was easy on the math.

Jade_Tarem
2009-09-22, 09:01 PM
Actually RHD do stack with 1/2 Initator level with Martial adepts.
LA are the "non-real" levels, they are empty levels.
RHD are (usually) sucky real levels.

ECL = LA + RHD + Class levels. Although you can trade 1 RHD if you only have one with a class level (which is why humaniods have classes)

This is correct. Monster characters make bad casters - even the "caster" monsters like Rhakshasa. It's a fact. There are things you can do to end-run the problem, though - Elemental Adept's capstone ability lets you be an elemental and an almost full caster.

Myrmex
2009-09-22, 09:06 PM
Drow are an ECL +1 race in the 3.0 DMG. I think they're identical to 3.5 drow.

Gloura, from races of the underdark, is a race worth the HD/LA. It's basically a bard without the singing and a paladin-like charisma to saves & AC ability. I actually rate the Gloura more better than an equal number of levels in bard. But that's because I don't value singing as a character's special power. At all.

FMArthur
2009-09-22, 10:21 PM
They get several abilities, and their only downside is -2 Con.
Compare that to gnomes, half-elves, and half-orcs. Those three are half of the races in the PHB. Okay, I guess they're middling. Still.

Also, where's the Marrulurk? (also, sneak attack does stack. Just so you know.)

Elves have +2 Dex and sleep immunity as their primary features, and pay for it with -2 Con, which is a bad trade even assuming that races are only supposed to break even with nothing at all. Other races? They gain something worthwhile even if they lose something less important. It's almost impossible to find a reason to play a basic elf compared to most of its subraces.

Akal Saris
2009-09-22, 10:40 PM
I didn't miss the 3 monsterous HD, I was just wrong about how LA works.
I thought LA +1 means that, regardless of anything else, if your party is level 10, you can play as a level 9 creature with LA+1.

The way you are putting it makes a lot more sense. Still a good creature, but it commits the cardinal sin of sacrificing caster progression. It will make very nice non casters.

Exactly =)

Sorry if I was blunt about the monstrous HD, by the way - it really is a very poorly explained section of the rules.



Gloura, from races of the underdark, is a race worth the HD/LA. It's basically a bard without the singing and a paladin-like charisma to saves & AC ability. I actually rate the Gloura more better than an equal number of levels in bard. But that's because I don't value singing as a character's special power. At all.

If the DM lets you pick your spells and feats known rather than the given examples, and lets the racial spells stack with levels in bard or a PrC, then I think a gloura would be a pretty sweet fey race :) Certainly a good choice for polymorph too, with spell-casting appendages, flight, and a high dex!

Other fey that can be worthwhile are the Petal (MM....4?) and the Pixie. I'm not a huge fan of either, but they have their uses as scouts and dex-based fighters or archers.

Minotaur sees some use in high-end min/max exercises for its inability to be surprised, which is useful in theoretical fights where whoever wins initiative wins the fight. But it's not particularly good in actual play.

tyckspoon
2009-09-22, 10:51 PM
Minotaur sees some use in high-end min/max exercises for its inability to be surprised, which is useful in theoretical fights where whoever wins initiative wins the fight. But it's not particularly good in actual play.

It's actually not that bad- Large size, +8 Strength, and a full BAB monster-type make a tolerable base for most melee characters. The +2 LA and general suckiness of racial HD make it bad for hardcore optimization (if you want that kind of benefit in serious optimization, you use/abuse Half-Minotaur or Half-Ogre instead) but if you just really want to be a big monster bruiser there are many worse choices than Minotaur.

sambo.
2009-09-22, 11:43 PM
i'm playing a drow in a PbP campaign at the moment and I feel HIDEOUSLY gimped by that +2 LA.

however: my DM has allowed me to brew up drow knockout poison (using a third party splatbook) which can even things out somewhat.

but the bottom line is: i'm running around in a "lvl4" party with a mighty 14 hitpoints (fighter1/wizard1 atm) (i really should have taken a higher Con).

once i'm able to buy off the level adjustment, i daresay that 'toon will be somewhat more powerful, but in the early stages, i'm very squishy (nearly got OHK'd by a half-orc fighter we encountered) and very lightly armoured.

if your going to play a drow, you REALLY have to play to your stengths (120' darkvision!) and don't write off the spell-like-abilities, with some creative thinking, they are kinda handy to have.

as for the spell-resistance: i'm hoping mine will help keep me alive long enough for it to become really useful. i took a Spider familiar and got a +2 Spell Res bonus because of DM generosity.

Zaq
2009-09-23, 12:07 AM
On the topic of races that are worth playing, Poison Dusk Lizardfolk make pretty good sneaky-types. Small, 30 ft. speed, +3 NA, +2 DEX and CON for -2 CHA, racial bonuses to a few nice skills (including +5 Hide), and (nicest of all in my opinion) a claw/claw/bite routine all for +1 LA. (Claw/claw/bite is good, basically, because it takes you a long time before you can make three attacks with straight up TWF, and even then you'll be taking larger to-hit penalties than a C/C/B routine. It's only at the really high levels that it stops being useful, by which point you've probably bought off your LA anyway.) I can see someone like a Rogue getting a lot of mileage out of a Poison Dusk.

Myrmex
2009-09-23, 03:53 AM
If the DM lets you pick your spells and feats known rather than the given examples, and lets the racial spells stack with levels in bard or a PrC, then I think a gloura would be a pretty sweet fey race :) Certainly a good choice for polymorph too, with spell-casting appendages, flight, and a high dex!

Well, I'm pretty sure that racial HD casting stacks with other casting, and that you can pick you skills & feats from racial HD. Otherwise, anything with racial HD is SERIOUSLY gimped.

The gloura works well in conjunction with sublime chord and/or hexblade/paladin/blackguard/swordsage/monk, since you an get some sweet charisma synergy.



Other fey that can be worthwhile are the Petal (MM....4?) and the Pixie. I'm not a huge fan of either, but they have their uses as scouts and dex-based fighters or archers.

Yeah, there are some people out there that really like the Pixie. There's a fey that has sorcerer levels associated with its HD. Can't remember its name, though.

Ernir
2009-09-23, 04:32 AM
Yeah, there are some people out there that really like the Pixie. There's a fey that has sorcerer levels associated with its HD. Can't remember its name, though.
Sylph, MM2.

And it is an outsider, apparently. I was surprised too, it looks as fey-y as anything I have seen. :smallconfused:

Gnaeus
2009-09-23, 05:40 AM
Even then, they are best as a rogue race (Death Attack and +2s6 sneak attack), but since their first HD is in their racial class, they don't get the advantage of 4x8+Int skills at 1st level, so they are inferior as skills-based characters to a normal human rogue.

So I'd say they are good as a combat rogue race, but worse than human as a skills rogue, and worse than human at nearly any other race+class combo.


A little worse than human as a skills rogue, but not so much that you would notice. Yes, you only get 2+int for the 3 RHD. But you get bonuses to hide, move silently, listen and spot, all skills rogues need. You get more bonuses from your super high stats, and while you don't get a racial bonus to int, in any point buy systems you can really dump other stats and still come out above average after your racial adjustments.

And free point blank shot, precise shot, and bow proficiency while keeping your sneak attack + really does a lot for ranged rogues.

Its true that they make awful casters, unless casters include Assassins.

Random832
2009-09-23, 09:11 AM
Sylph, MM2.

And it is an outsider, apparently. I was surprised too, it looks as fey-y as anything I have seen. :smallconfused:

Does D&D even have "fey" as such? The closest thing I can think of are 3.x Eladrin (which are also outsiders. [chaotic, good] whereas the sylph is [air], though)

*checks the SRD* it does, apparently. Well, the "outsider" type is kind of generic anyway.

Kaiyanwang
2009-09-23, 09:23 AM
Sylph, MM2.

And it is an outsider, apparently. I was surprised too, it looks as fey-y as anything I have seen. :smallconfused:

Yeah. I was so disappointed that I remade it as a fey. Nimph fey and Silph outsider? It makes no sense.

But is MMII, after all. I hate as much as I love it. Odi et amo..

GreatWyrmGold
2009-09-23, 04:15 PM
Elves have +2 Dex and sleep immunity as their primary features, and pay for it with -2 Con, which is a bad trade even assuming that races are only supposed to break even with nothing at all. Other races? They gain something worthwhile even if they lose something less important. It's almost impossible to find a reason to play a basic elf compared to most of its subraces.

Okay, I was wrong. A lot of the gnome's stuff is like that, but very little, if anything, past the Con +2 is worth much, and the -2 penalty to Str is almost as bad as -2 to Con. Half-elves also mostly have the minor abilities; their only major ability is shared by elves. Then again, they also lack -2 Con. But don't get me started on half-orcs.
...
Still...

...I mentioned that I'm a monk fan, right?



If the DM lets you pick your spells and feats known rather than the given examples, and lets the racial spells stack with levels in bard or a PrC...
I think those are the standard rules.

...the Petal (MM....4?)...
No. Three.

DragoonWraith
2009-09-23, 04:24 PM
-2 penalty to Str is almost as bad as -2 to Con.
Disagree. Lots and lots of classes can dump Str. No one can dump Con. For many classes, yes, -2 Str is unacceptable, but for plenty it's just fine.

I'd sooner ditch a Kobold's -2 Con than their -4 Str.

GreatWyrmGold
2009-09-24, 05:14 PM
Disagree. Lots and lots of classes can dump Str. No one can dump Con. For many classes, yes, -2 Str is unacceptable, but for plenty it's just fine.

I'd sooner ditch a Kobold's -2 Con than their -4 Str.

Classes in PHB where Strength is nesesary: Barbarian, Fighter, Monk, Paladin, Ranger (twf)
Classes in PHB where strength is very useful: Cleric, Druid, Ranger (a)
Classes in PHB where Strength is useful: Bard, Rogue
Classes in PHB where Strength is useless: Sorceror, Wizard

4-1/2 out of 11 classes find Strength VITAL. 2-1/2 find it very useful. 2 each find it useful and useless.
Yeah, when more than half of the PHB classes find an ability score very useful or crucial, it's obviously not useless...

I'm not saying it's as bad as a penalty to Con. I'm saying it's bad.

wadledo
2009-09-24, 05:26 PM
Classes in PHB where Strength is nesesary: Barbarian, Fighter, Monk, Paladin, Ranger (twf)
Classes in PHB where strength is very useful: Cleric, Druid, Ranger (a)
Classes in PHB where Strength is useful: Bard, Rogue
Classes in PHB where Strength is useless: Sorceror, Wizard

4-1/2 out of 11 classes find Strength VITAL. 2-1/2 find it very useful. 2 each find it useful and useless.
Yeah, when more than half of the PHB classes find an ability score very useful or crucial, it's obviously not useless...

I'm not saying it's as bad as a penalty to Con. I'm saying it's bad.

You're wrong on Druid, Rogue and in some cases Cleric.
And of all those classes, you'll notice that the Druid, Cleric, Sorcerer, and Wizard can crush all the others.

Str is not that important, because at best you you do damage with it. And damage is cheap.

HCL
2009-09-24, 05:35 PM
Gnome is a tier 1 race, even without Races of Stone awesomeness. +2 con is good for everyone. Strength and medium size are important for... melee?

Compare a gnome archivist, bard, druid, wizard, sorcerer, hell even cleric ranger and rogue to a high elf.

Eldan
2009-09-24, 05:40 PM
Yeah. I was so disappointed that I remade it as a fey. Nimph fey and Silph outsider? It makes no sense.

But is MMII, after all. I hate as much as I love it. Odi et amo..

Can be justified... the Sylph is, in the legends, the elemental spirit of air, after all. So they just moved it in the same categories as the four genies.

GreatWyrmGold
2009-09-24, 07:32 PM
Fine, fine, I give up! I suck at optimising! I play elves! I play monks! I use VoP! I play races with level adjustments! I play for FUN, not to be able to crush the world under my little toe! So sue me.

sofawall
2009-09-24, 07:44 PM
Classes in PHB where Strength is nesesary: Barbarian, Fighter, Monk, Paladin, Ranger (twf)
Classes in PHB where strength is very useful: Cleric, Druid, Ranger (a)
Classes in PHB where Strength is useful: Bard, Rogue
Classes in PHB where Strength is useless: Sorceror, Wizard

Classes in PHB where con is necessary: Barbarian, Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Monk, Paladin, Ranger, Sorcerer, Wizard,
Classes in PHB where con is very useful: Bard, Rogue
Classes in PHB where con is useful: None.
Classes in any book where con is useless: Only the undead ones.

Worira
2009-09-24, 07:55 PM
which makes you a level 6, not a level 9. 3 levels of "monster" aren't "real" levels because they don't STACK with anything and ruin your caster progression / ability progression...
A level 9 wizard with those bonuses is better than a level 10 without, or a level 19 wizard with those bonuses is better than a level 20 without...

I don't understand what you mean by stacking. Or for that matter, ability progression. Everything about a marrulurk stacks with rogue levels, and you still get +1 to any stat every four HD.

GreatWyrmGold
2009-09-24, 07:59 PM
I don't understand what you mean by stacking. Or for that matter, ability progression. Everything about a marrulurk stacks with rogue levels, and you still get +1 to any stat every four HD.

Simple. The RHD don't stack with stuff. Racial abilities, though, do. Also, you don't get +1 to stats for monster levels, only ones later.

Worira
2009-09-24, 08:07 PM
What do you mean, RHD don't stack with stuff? What about them doesn't? And yes, they do stack for ability score increases (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/improvingMonsters.htm#featAcquisitionandAbilitySco reIncreases).

HCL
2009-09-24, 08:17 PM
Fine, fine, I give up! I suck at optimising! I play elves! I play monks! I use VoP! I play races with level adjustments! I play for FUN, not to be able to crush the world under my little toe! So sue me.

Thats fine. Just don't try to tell me that high elf is a better race then gnome lol.