Dead Level Fillers

[Temotei]

I know there's an archived article on dead levels on Wizards, but I don't remember any dead level fillers for classes other than those in core. Is there any information on this stuff? I'm specifically looking for fillers for debuffers, like the hexblade.

[Myrmex]

MONK

The monk is the only other core class, aside from the barbarian, that has no dead levels. Players always have something to look forward to with the monk, which boasts the most colorful and unique special abilities of all the character classes.


BAUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

[Dhavaer]

Enjoy: Dead levels 2 (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20070227x).

[Kaiyanwang]

BAUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Yeah, I remember this. and I had a similar reaction (I'm not a monk basher, but.. come on!).

Anyway, technically, they are right... every level is filled. If you want a real fix, you need to write an article with ACFs.

[Temotei]

Enjoy: Dead levels 2 (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20070227x).

Thanks much. :smallsmile:

If any of you have other ideas for filling dead levels, I'd appreciate them. I'm looking particularly for debuff effects. Since they're dead level fillers, they can't be too powerful. Essentially fluff with a tiny little mechanical use.

Oh, and as for the monk thing...yeah. I think they did it on purpose. It's all a conspiracy. This way, no one can add dead level abilities, which would almost be better than half of the monk's current abilities, sadly enough. :smallbiggrin:

[Mongoose87]

Enjoy: Dead levels 2 (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20070227x).

lol @ designers notes 4 favored sowle!

[Kaiyanwang]

lol @ designers notes 4 favored sowle!

This is a ninja-fix I guess. But I like it, the article needed MORE imho.

[dsmiles]

I don't believe that every level needs to be filled. The core classes were written that way for a reason. I don't know what that reason is, but I'm sure they had one at the time.

[Kaiyanwang]

I don't believe that every level needs to be filled. The core classes were written that way for a reason. I don't know what that reason is, but I'm sure they had one at the time.

maybe I'm wrong, but consider two things (IMHO):

- something has been overlooked. Example: fighter takes few skill points because otherwise, with all these feats would be . Or a +1 BAB is enough, and so on.

-legacy. they filled levels in some way but the coneption of every level filled came later, I think.

[Optimystik]

I don't believe that every level needs to be filled. The core classes were written that way for a reason. I don't know what that reason is, but I'm sure they had one at the time.

I think you should get something every level (besides BAB, skill points and saves.) It doesn't have to be an ability or feat, but in those cases should be at least new spells/maneuvers known, or the ability to retrain something previously taken.

Wizards can therefore live with their current progression, because they get new spells known every level. But fighter should be gaining maneuvers or something.

[Saintjebus]

Somebody posted a possible fighter dead level fix last week or so. It involved giving free templates for dead levels..... let me see if I can find it.

[nekomata2]

Anyone else find it funny that seduction is Bluff? Ah, swashbuckler...the class that has rules for sleeping around...

[taltamir]

i think their idea was "he spends 4 dead levels on this class to get the super awesome treat on the 5th level" (eg: wizard's bonus feats). or "his basic features, like magic, are so awesome he doesn't need any more features" (eg: sorcerer).

The problem is, with all the extra content that 5th level deliciousness is not that delicious, in fact it is often downright bad compared to what you could be taking instead.

[taltamir]

Anyone else find it funny that seduction is Bluff? Ah, swashbuckler...the class that has rules for sleeping around...

it is social commentary by the nerds who do DnD for a living. I wouldn't put much stock in what THEY think about human mating habits.

[Saintjebus]

Here we go. Found it.

Dead Level Thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=133626&highlight=%22dead+levels%22)

Essentially, to sum up, you get a free +1 LA every dead level. These LAs stack, and can be "retrained" every time you get a new one. your LA at any given time is the sum of your dead levels. You can have any number of templates, as long as the total LA is your # of dead levels.

[Optimystik]

Here we go. Found it.

Dead Level Thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=133626&highlight=%22dead+levels%22)

Essentially, to sum up, you get a free +1 LA every dead level. These LAs stack, and can be "retrained" every time you get a new one. your LA at any given time is the sum of your dead levels. You can have any number of templates, as long as the total LA is your # of dead levels.

Interesting. How did that work in practice? I could see that bumping pure fighter up several tiers - picking a race with wings alone would help it stay pretty relevant.

[taltamir]

Interesting. How did that work in practice? I could see that bumping pure fighter up several tiers - picking a race with wings alone would help it stay pretty relevant.

raptorians are a +0 LA winged race.

[Saintjebus]

I've never seen it in practice. It seemed like it would be a relatively good fix, though which templates would be allowed would have to be pretty tightly controlled. One of the examples given was the half-fiend template, which does grant flight. At the time the fighter qualified, however, the wizard had gotten flight a level or two before. Still better than having to rely on magic items exclusively, though.

Edit: This wasn't so much the fighter just getting fee LA at character creation- these were templates applied after the fact. For example:

Human fighter, makes 3rd level(first dead level). He chooses a +1 LA template, and gains all of the qualities of said template.

[Aldizog]

Trap sense! Give everybody Trap Sense to fill in the "dead levels"! Trap sense +2! Trap sense +3!

I am firmly of the belief that this ability was invented to appeal to the players who wanted a cookie every level. No matter if the cookie tasted like cardboard, at least they got a cookie. And then there are the classes and PrCs that add uses per day of an existing ability to fill in five or six "dead levels." By that reasoning, monks with Stunning Fist do even better than their existing no-dead-level-uber-awesomeness, since they get another use per day at every level.

Of course, coming from a B/X background and still loving that game, the "dead levels" complaint never resonated with me. It just doesn't have anything to do with what I think leveling is about. And what the warrior NPC class gets for leveling in 3.5 is extravagantly rich compared to the B/X fighter.

[Saintjebus]

Of course, coming from a B/X background and still loving that game, the "dead levels" complaint never resonated with me. It just doesn't have anything to do with what I think leveling is about. And what the warrior NPC class gets for leveling in 3.5 is extravagantly rich compared to the B/X fighter.

What do you think leveling is about? I always thought of it as the chance to get more powerful, through class abilities.

(I'm not trying to be glib or sarcastic, I'm asking in seriousness.)

[Aldizog]

What do you think leveling is about? I always thought of it as the chance to get more powerful, through class abilities.

(I'm not trying to be glib or sarcastic, I'm asking in seriousness.)
It's the 3E-onwards focus on "class abilities" that I'm skeptical of. BAB and HP are class abilities. Another 1d10+3 hp is the ability to take another two crossbow bolts and stay fighting. BAB and HP already give high-level combatants an enormous advantage over the low-level ones.

What you had in B/X was modest improvement of those existing abilities. It tended to have a flatter power curve than 3.5, which is one of the decisions that I think 4E got right. Seriously, play B/X or 1E/2E for a while and recognize just how valuable BAB, HP, and saves are as you level. Character improvement was partly mechanical and partly in-story (contacts, resources, reputation, strongholds, etc.). But identifying optimal builds and accumulating special abilities were just not part of the game. And I'm not saying this is a badwrongfun way to play... I'm just not convinced that the pre-3E version is badwrongfun and that "dead levels" are a real problem.

[drengnikrafe]

What do you think leveling is about? I always thought of it as the chance to get more powerful, through class abilities.

(I'm not trying to be glib or sarcastic, I'm asking in seriousness.)

I've always thought levels to be more about... getting more powerful, in general. After all, a commoner 20 is more powerful than a commoner 1, and, while my memory is far from perfect, I don't remember commoners getting any class abilities.

That being said, what should actually qualify as a "dead level"? I see people calling new sorcerer levels non-dead levels because of new spells. Spells are the backbone of the sorcerer, just like BAB and HP is the backbone of the fighter. Stating that Sorcerers have no dead levels, but fighters have 9... Well, at this point we've basically entirely forgone role-playing in favor of balance and metagaming.

Yes, class abilities are cool, but so is role-playing. Though my exposure has been limited, I find very few well role-played things that have a dozen dips for the sake of power. I know there's that Fallacy... Umm... Stormwind Fallacy, or something like that. However, that's a general trend I see.

My final conclusion is that demanding a class ability every level is foolish. When you do, you end up with things like the Barbarian and Monk: Full of abilities that make a marginal amount of sense, but also make a reasonable amount of nonsense.

[Optimystik]

raptorians are a +0 LA winged race.

Yes, but by RAW, they can only actually fly when they have 5 Hit Dice.

[Myrmex]

Yes, but by RAW, they can only actually fly when they have 5 Hit Dice.

And if your DM is requiring your party to solve major obstacles with flight prior to ECL 5, he's a ****.

[Saintjebus]

Pphhsss. I always solved those by having the barbarian throw the smallest party member- almost always a halfling rogue around to fling about.

[Optimystik]

And if your DM is requiring your party to solve major obstacles with flight prior to ECL 5, he's a ****.

5 Hit Die it says, not class level 5.

So Raptoran 5/Fighter 1 to be a flying fighter, by RAW. Note that I'm not saying Raptorans were meant to be played this way, just pointing out the wording.

[Myrmex]

5 Hit Die it says, not class level 5.

So Raptoran 5/Fighter 1 to be a flying fighter, by RAW. Note that I'm not saying Raptorans were meant to be played this way, just pointing out the wording.

HD + LA = ECL
The minimum level a flying raptoran is ECL 5, here is the math:
5 + 0 = 5

[Optimystik]

HD + LA = ECL
The minimum level a flying raptoran is ECL 5, here is the math:
5 + 0 = 5

I know all that, but hit die != class levels.

[tyckspoon]

I know all that, but hit die != class levels.

Yes. Yes it is. When you gain a class level it always comes with a hit die. It's that thing you roll to find out how many HP you just gained.

Edit: And yes, there is a difference between a racial hit die and a class-sourced hit die, and some templates/abilities do reference this- monster special abilities usually do have their DCs based off their monster hit dice, and won't be improved if you give them class levels. I do not believe the Raptoran draws that distinction, however, and as an LA 0 1 HD being would normally never be expected to have racial/monstrous hit dice at all.

[Gamerlord]

Yeah, I remember this. and I had a similar reaction (I'm not a monk basher, but.. come on!).

Anyway, technically, they are right... every level is filled. If you want a real fix, you need to write an article with ACFs.

I had a similear reaction to, "Wait, the monk?" although I have been thinking of a monk fix....

[Saintjebus]

A race with only one racial hit die exchanges that hit die for it's first class hit die. Look at the pixie in MM1 for an example.

[Temotei]

The reason I want dead level fillings is because I think it's nice to have something when you're only getting +1 to your good saves and another spell per day. Look at the swashbuckler. They get so many dead levels and small numerical increases...it's pretty dumb to take more than five levels, but three is usually the best time to quit in that class, simply because if you keep going in it, you're going to be loads weaker than if you took levels in (for example) rogue. And don't push the roleplaying thing down on me. You can roleplay, regardless of whether you have class features every level or not. Having a dead level is just a drag. If you can't roleplay well because you got another sneak attack damage die, you have a problem.

[SurlySeraph]

Well, Swashbuckler can be useful with Daring Outlaw. Full BAB + Sneak Attack is nice, and while you could do that with the Sneak Attack Fighter variant the Swash abilities are at least a slight bonus.

I mean, it's not remotely worth it compared to, say, a ToB class, but there are conceivable reasons to do it.

[Temotei]

Well, Swashbuckler can be useful with Daring Outlaw. Full BAB + Sneak Attack is nice, and while you could do that with the Sneak Attack Fighter variant the Swash abilities are at least a slight bonus.

I mean, it's not remotely worth it compared to, say, a ToB class, but there are conceivable reasons to do it.

Indeed. My point was to get across that you can roleplay, whether your class has little stuffing bits (slow fall?) in all of the levels, or if it just has a big turkey ability (full spellcasting). It just doesn't matter in terms of roleplaying.

Gameplay-wise though, people want to have a little bit of stuffing every level. While the turkey is surely delicious and great, stuffing makes the meal all that much better, right?

That's why I want dead level fillers. My current purpose is for a class I'm making, but in the future, I'm sure I can use ideas too.