an alignment question

[big teej]

greetings playgrounders,

I recently finished reading the Book of Vile Darkness, and I have a question about something I found in it.

the bone template... and the Corpse template for that matter

neither one specified an alignment change, so I was wondering, do these templates have inherent alignment changes?

or no?

thanks in advance

[Yuki Akuma]

If they don't specify an alignment change, the answer is no.

They're in there because Necromancy Is Evil, presumably.

[big teej]

thankee

hello character concept ^_^

[The Glyphstone]

Don't they also have LA - ? Without DM negotiation, you can't even play a Bone/Corpse Creature.

[hamishspence]

They have no listed LA- so the DM has to guess.

Corpse Creature has alignment "Any evil" listed if you check the template- Bone Creature has no alignment listed in the template. The sample creature was a bugbear and had CE alignment though.

As a 3.0 template, Bone Creature has half damage from piercing and slashing weapons, as skeletons used to- rather than the standard DR 5/bludgeoning that 3.5 skeletons have.

[Lord_Gareth]

Both templates are also broken as all hell.

[hamishspence]

In what way?

Closest thing I can think of is Create Undead and Create Greater Undead not having a hit dice minimum to create, so in theory (if your DM didn't make a ruling) you could create a Bone version of a very powerful creature- if you found one and cast the spell on its body.

But Create Undead & Create Greater Undead don't by default allow you to control your creation either- you need Control Undead or Command Undead to do that.

A simple fix is to rule that the creature created with Create Undead may not have more HD than you, if it uses either of these templates.

[big teej]

given that the template has no given LA
and no given alignment change,

I was planning on playing a LG or LN Human Knight with the Bone template... and make the party wonder why my armour never came off.....

and maybe multi class to cleric so I can heal myself. etc.

I don't quite see how the template is broken, as a Knight, my HD is d12 anyways, and I'll get +4 str, and DR..... given that I'm more experienced than any other players, it wouldn't be a huge inconvienence for the DM to set me a level or 2 behind the party to make up for being... well, dead. but personally I think the Role play and secret keeping hurdles would almost be enough to balance it on its own....

but thats my perspective from the DM side of the screen....

anyways, in summary
"why is the template broken?" I'm not a powergamer, (HONEST) I just saw the bone template and a light bulb went off....


/ramble

[Yuki Akuma]

LA - is different to LA +0 - the former means "no, you can't play this, stop it".

[Shhalahr Windrider]

They don’t have LA —. They don’t have an LA listing period. BoVD is 3.0. It came out before LA was used in any book other than Savage Species. As such it is up to the player to get an okayed 3.5 update (one potential change point has been noted above by hamishspence) as well as an appropriate LA estimate.

[big teej]

forgive my ignorance.... BUT!!!

isn't the difference between 3.0 and 3.5 small enough that (the majority of) things can be run with effectivly zero change?

(fyi, my group plays 3.x so both are viable, I'm just curious as to how much work conversion shall be)

[Shhalahr Windrider]

forgive my ignorance.... BUT!!!

isn't the difference between 3.0 and 3.5 small enough that (the majority of) things can be run with effectivly zero change?
Most things, Yes. But not all. DR x/+1 and class-exclusive skills for example.

Other things could be retained, but should be changed anyway due to changes in design philosophy. The “half damage from slashing and piercing” thing is one such change. 3.0 did not feature DR x/bludgeoning, x/piercing, or x/slashing. Leaving the half-damage thing showed that they only did half the job they meant to do with the introduction of DR to begin with. So half damage should be converted to DR.


(fyi, my group plays 3.x so both are viable, I'm just curious as to how much work conversion shall be)
Change “half damage from piercing and slashing” to DR 5/bludgeoning, Weapon Finesse applies to all finessable weapons, and probably add the augmented subtype. Finally, calculate an appropriate LA (I suggest +2, eyeballing it). That should be it.

[big teej]

Most things, Yes. But not all. DR x/+1 and class-exclusive skills for example.

Other things could be retained, but should be changed anyway due to changes in design philosophy. The “half damage from slashing and piercing” thing is one such change. 3.0 did not feature DR x/bludgeoning, x/piercing, or x/slashing. Leaving the half-damage thing showed that they only did half the job they meant to do with the introduction of DR to begin with. So half damage should be converted to DR.


Change “half damage from piercing and slashing” to DR 5/bludgeoning, Weapon Focus applies to all weapons, and probably add the augmented subtype. Finally, calculate an appropriate LA (I suggest +2, eyeballing it). That should be it.

I was already going to change the DR (already had to do that for a 3.0 teaching module I'm running)

I don't have a book with "augmented" subtype in it..... unlesss its in

the DMG
the Arms and Equipment guide
the BOVD
cityscape
or the BOED (which I haven't read yet)

and I didn't see it

without said sub-type does that change LA?
what about removing of some of the abilities of the template?

[Shhalahr Windrider]

I was already going to change the DR (already had to do that for a 3.0 teaching module I'm running)

I don't have a book with "augmented" subtype in it..... unlesss its in

the DMG
the Arms and Equipment guide
the BOVD
cityscape
or the BOED (which I haven't read yet)

and I didn't see it
It’s 3.5 Core. In the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#augmentedSubtype). It’s kind of funky and not always clear when it applies, but most free-willed undead have it.


without said sub-type does that change LA?
No. The augmented subtype is almost pure bookkeeping with little (and in many cases no) effect on creature power level.


what about removing of some of the abilities of the template?
Naturally, they could. But then you’d effectively have a new, weaker template, rather than a true Bone Creature.

Alternatives include creating a Racial Class progression or using Level Adjustment buyoff (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/races/reducingLevelAdjustments.htm).

When calculating LA, remember the Acid Test is to give the creature an extra level in a strong class for that race and then compare it to an equivalent 0-LA being of the same class. The example given in Savage Species is an Ogre Fighter 1 versus a human Fighter. If one choice is clearly better than the other, the LA needs to be adjusted.

[big teej]

It’s 3.5 Core. In the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#augmentedSubtype). It’s kind of funky and not always clear when it applies, but most free-willed undead have it.


No. The augmented subtype is almost pure bookkeeping with little (and in many cases no) effect on creature power level.


Naturally, they could. But then you’d effectively have a new, weaker template, rather than a true Bone Creature.

Alternatives include creating a Racial Class progression or using Level Adjustment buyoff (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#augmentedSubtype).

When calculating LA, remember the Acid Test is to give the creature an extra level in a strong class for that race and then compare it to an equivalent 0-LA being of the same class. The example given in Savage Species is an Ogre Fighter 1 versus a human Fighter. If one choice is clearly better than the other, the LA needs to be adjusted.

oh, okay, I have next to no experience with LA so I'm really .... at a loss here.

so what constitutes 'clearly better'?
and how much should the LA be adjusted?

for instance, given my (perhaps flawed) understanding of the bone template, if I were to create a character using this template (at level 1)
it would be the following
bone template knight
d12 hit die
str: 4d6 drop lowest + 4
dex - cha: 4d6 drop lowest
DR 5/bludgeoning
Darkvision
*anything I forgot about that the template grants

vs
human Knight
d12 hit die
all stats: 4d6 drop lowest
no DR
human traits

now granted, the bone template is "clearly better" in these circumstances, but thats a human knight, what about something with racial modifiers? such as a dwarf?

in my opinion, it becomes less "clearly better"

BUT, being a rampant anti-powergaming and anti-munchkin, my views on this could be (very very very) flawed, and likely are....

soooo
going back to my question
what constitutes "clearly better"?

edit: how does LA buyoff work?
I keep seeing the phrase, but know nothing about the process.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

so what constitutes 'clearly better'?
The better race is so strong that there is no mechanical justification for playing the other race in a class for which the race is best suited.

(Note to all readers: The following is based on the assumption that the +2 LA for Ogres is appropriate. I am not interested in debating that point, I just need an example. Please, do not make this into a thread about the shortcomings of the LA system as applied by WotC.)

Taking the Ogre example back up, the Ogre’s massive bonuses to Strength and Constitution as well as its natural armor tends to overshadow most of what you can get with Fighter or Barbarian levels. Since the Ogre has 4 racial HD, you compare an Ogre Barbarian 1 with a Dwarf or Human Barbarian 5. With those massive bonuses, there are very few mechanical reasons to play the Dwarf or Human. So LA +0 is not appropriate.

On the other end of the scale, an Ogre Barbarian 1 is clearly inferior to a Human Barbarian 8, so LA +4 is too much. So an Ogre should fall somewhere between +0 and +4.


and how much should the LA be adjusted?
As much as is required for both races to break approximately even.


for instance, given my (perhaps flawed) understanding of the bone template, if I were to create a character using this template (at level 1)
it would be the following
bone template knight
d12 hit die
str: 4d6 drop lowest + 4
dex - cha: 4d6 drop lowest
DR 5/bludgeoning
Darkvision
*anything I forgot about that the template grants
The Undead type (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#undeadType), which carries a large list of immunities, and a few relatively minor weaknesses.
Cold immunity
Natural secondary attack
Bonus Weapon Finesse Feat
Most of the traits and features of the base creature
The large number of immunities from the Undead type are worth LA on their own, really.


vs
human Knight
d12 hit die
all stats: 4d6 drop lowest
no DR
human traits

now granted, the bone template is "clearly better" in these circumstances, but thats a human knight, what about something with racial modifiers? such as a dwarf?

in my opinion, it becomes less "clearly better"
Indeed. A Dwarf has a fair number of racial abilities that make them good knights. So using a dwarf as a baseline would be a good idea.

Note that the bone creature explicitly retains most of the base creature special abilities, so an individual comparison with a bone creature of the base would be a good idea as well.

All the above assumes that Bone Creatures make good knights, which I’d say they do. Though I’d peg their Favored Class as Fighter.


BUT, being a rampant anti-powergaming and anti-munchkin, my views on this could be (very very very) flawed, and likely are....
Yeah, finding a balanced LA does require a decent eye for optimization, since the acid test requires a comparison of fairly well-optimized specimens.


edit: how does LA buyoff work?
I keep seeing the phrase, but know nothing about the process.
Oh, damn. I pasted the wrong link. Here we go!

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/races/reducingLevelAdjustments.htm

[big teej]

The better race is so strong that there is no mechanical justification for playing the other race in a class for which the race is best suited.

gotcha




(Note to all readers: The following is based on the assumption that the +2 LA for Ogres is appropriate. I am not interested in debating that point, I just need an example. Please, do not make this into a thread about the shortcomings of the LA system as applied by WotC.)
[/url]

seconded, I do not want to see another of my threads turn into an off topic debate :smallfrown:



The Undead type (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#undeadType), which carries a large list of immunities, and a few relatively minor weaknesses.
Cold immunity
Natural secondary attack
Bonus Weapon Finesse Feat
Most of the traits and features of the base creature
The large number of immunities from the Undead type are worth LA on their own, really.


Indeed. A Dwarf has a fair number of racial abilities that make them good knights. So using a dwarf as a baseline would be a good idea.

Note that the bone creature explicitly retains most of the base creature special abilities, so an individual comparison with a bone creature of the base would be a good idea as well.

All the above assumes that Bone Creatures make good knights, which I’d say they do. Though I’d peg their Favored Class as Fighter.


I agree that the deadish qualities earn their own LA. so I'll probably pitch it to whoever DM's this as a minimum of LA+1

however, while a dwarf would make a better comparison as far as ability, I plan to apply the template to a HUMAN... should the dwarf knight still be used as the comparison? or should I attempt to make it "on par" with a human knight?
*as sort of a redundant add on to this
as a human, the character will get no special abilities, so the 'retains blah blah blah' isn't an issue (at least I think not...)

as far as favored class, my groups tend to ignore that and favored class aside, the concept I have in mind calls for a Knight.... though I suppose I could run with a fighter instead.... I haven't settled on the 'primary' class for this build yet.



Yeah, finding a balanced LA does require a decent eye for optimization, since the acid test requires a comparison of fairly well-optimized specimens.


Oh, damn. I pasted the wrong link. Here we go!

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/races/reducingLevelAdjustments.htm

as I've already mentioned, I most definilty do NOT have a 'decent eye for optimization' as I avoid it like the plauge, its not fun for me.
should I start another thread for the 'acid test'?
the only 'optimization' threads I've ever made were
1) how to make the rules work the way I want for a BBEG (a full plate electric orb wielding spiked chain fighter type)
2) 'buffing' an NPC villian in a teaching module

I'm always very hesitant to start optimization threads, most of it flies well over my head and far beyond my interest


last....

I am confused by the LA buy off =( I perhaps have a misunderstanding (likely a colossal one) of why LA is such a terrible thing.... but that may be a topic for another thread.

>.< so much to learn....:smallannoyed:

[awa]

whats an appropriate level adjustment varies greatly between groups, losing one levels of fighter for increased strength, con and natural armor is not a bad trade losing levels of druid, cleric or wizard is much harsher because these classes are better.

the other thing which level buy off addresses is that many templates and races have abilities that are overpowered at level 1 but common and easily acquired at high level such as continuous flight is a good example its a huge deal for a level one character to be able to fly but by level 20 being able to fly is very easy to acquire and thus not worth the loss of a level.

[Yuki Akuma]

Just because dwarves have a long list of racial abilities doesn't make them better than humans.

In fact humans are one of the top four races in the game. (The other two are human subraces and one is a halfling subrace that gets a bonus feat).

The bonus feat is just that good.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

however, while a dwarf would make a better comparison as far as ability, I plan to apply the template to a HUMAN... should the dwarf knight still be used as the comparison? or should I attempt to make it "on par" with a human knight?
As Yuki said, the bonus feat is really good enough that it doesn’t matter much. Dwarf and Human are both good classes to use as a baseline.


*as sort of a redundant add on to this
as a human, the character will get no special abilities, so the 'retains blah blah blah' isn't an issue (at least I think not...)
By my reading, it should retain the bonus feat and bonus skill points.


as far as favored class, my groups tend to ignore that and favored class aside, the concept I have in mind calls for a Knight.... though I suppose I could run with a fighter instead.... I haven't settled on the 'primary' class for this build yet.
Yeah, I actually realized that the favored class would probably actually be “same as base creature”. However, the template grants bonuses that are geared towards melee. So Fighter—or even Knight— should be the acid test. So we’re good here.


as I've already mentioned, I most definilty do NOT have a 'decent eye for optimization' as I avoid it like the plauge, its not fun for me.
should I start another thread for the 'acid test'?
Probably wouldn’t hurt if you aren’t confident at doing this on your own.


I'm always very hesitant to start optimization threads, most of it flies well over my head and far beyond my interest
Well, I don’t think that should be much of a problem, since all you really need is an LA. You can leave the details for other people. :smallwink:



I am confused by the LA buy off =( I perhaps have a misunderstanding (likely a colossal one) of why LA is such a terrible thing.... but that may be a topic for another thread.
Well, LA is a problem because it says, for example, that a 6th-level character is really as powerful as a 10th-level character. As such, they should be facing 10th level threats. All with fewer hit points, feats, and skill ranks. Also makes them vulnerable to effects based on HD, such as blasphemy (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/blasphemy.htm) or frightful presence (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#frightfulPresence).

As awa said, LA buyoff is a way of reducing this impact at later levels where the racial abilities do not make the race as overpowered as it would be at earlier levels. The main idea is that at certain levels, your character pays extra XP, and the character’s level adjustment is reduced by one.

Taking your Bone Human Knight as an example, and assuming my initial estimate of LA +2 is accurate:

You start out as a Level 1 Knight at ECL 3. You only have 1 HD, 2 feats, and the skills of a 1st level Knight. However, you have the wealth of a third level character, earn experience as a 3rd level character, and are expected to pull your weight in 3rd level encounters.

Three levels later, you are a Level 6 Knight at ECL 8. Since you have 2 LA and no racial HD, you are eligible to buy off a level of LA. You immediately pay 7,000 XP and become a Level 6 Knght at ECL 7 with only 1 LA. This will put you behind the ECL of the rest of your party, but the XP catch-up mechanism will even that out quickly enough.

Eventually, you will become a Level 9 Knight at ECL 10. Once more, you are eligible to buy off LA. This time, you pay 9,000 XP. You are now a Level 9 Knight at ECL 9 with no LA at all. Once your XP catches up to the rest of the party, you will no longer have any of the disadvantages that come with LA.

Your progression becomes the following:
{table=head]ECL|Character Level|XP
3|1|Normal for third level
4|2|Normal for fourth level
5|3|Normal for fifth level
6|4|Normal for sixth level
7 pre-buyoff|5|Normal for seventh level
8 pre-buyoff|6|Normal for eighth level
7 post-buyoff|6|Normal for eighth level minus 7,000
8 post-buyoff|7|Normal for eighth level
9 pre-buyoff|8|Normal for ninth level
10 pre-buyoff|9|Normal for tenth level
9 post-buyoff|9|Normal for tenth level minus 9,000
10 post-buyoff|10|Normal for tenth level
11+|11+|Normal for its level[/table]

(Table avoids using actual XP numbers to comply with board rules on non-OGC content.)

Note that you never actually are at “ECL 8before buyoff” or “ECL 10 before buyoff” for more than the instant it takes you to actually pay the XP. You can pay the XP immediately and don’t have to bother actually adding a new Knight level.

[big teej]

As Yuki said, the bonus feat is really good enough that it doesn’t matter much. Dwarf and Human are both good classes to use as a baseline.


By my reading, it should retain the bonus feat and bonus skill points.



well, for 'special abilities' I was thinking more like "darkvision" rather than an extra feat and +4 skill points... but the point is moot. I'll use the Human Baseline, since the template is going to be applied to a human.



Probably wouldn’t hurt if you aren’t confident at doing this on your own.


Well, I don’t think that should be much of a problem, since all you really need is an LA. You can leave the details for other people. :smallwink:





I am most definitly not, haha.
in that case I'll probably post up a 'comparisoin' and ask the playgrounder at what point LA does x = y




Well, LA is a problem because it says, for example, that a 6th-level character is really as powerful as a 10th-level character. As such, they should be facing 10th level threats. All with fewer hit points, feats, and skill ranks. Also makes them vulnerable to effects based on HD, such as blasphemy (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/blasphemy.htm) or frightful presence (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#frightfulPresence).


As awa said, LA buyoff is a way of reducing this impact at later levels where the racial abilities do not make the race as overpowered as it would be at earlier levels. The main idea is that at certain levels, your character pays extra XP, and the character’s level adjustment is reduced by one.

Taking your Bone Human Knight as an example, and assuming my initial estimate of LA +2 is accurate:

You start out as a Level 1 Knight at ECL 3. You only have 1 HD, 2 feats, and the skills of a 1st level Knight. However, you have the wealth of a third level character, earn experience as a 3rd level character, and are expected to pull your weight in 3rd level encounters.

Three levels later, you are a Level 4 Knight at ECL 6. Since you have 2 LA and no racial HD, you are eligible to buy off a level of LA. You immediately pay 5,000 XP and become a Level 4 Knght at ECL 5 with only 1 LA. This will put you behind the ECL of the rest of your party, but the XP catch-up mechanism will even that out quickly enough.

Eventually, you will become a Level 8 Knight at ECL 9. Once more, you are eligible to buy off LA. This time, you pay 8,000 XP. You are now a Level 8 Knight at ECL 8 with no LA at all. Once your XP catches up to the rest of the party, you will no longer have any of the disadvantages that come with LA.

Your progression becomes the following:
{table=Head]ECL|Character Level|XP
3|1|normal for third level
4|2|normal for fourth level
5 before buyoff|3|normal for fifth level
6 before buyoff|4|normal for sixth level
5 after buyoff|4|normal for fifth level
6 after buyoff|5|normal for sixth level
7|6|normal for seventh level
8 before buyoff|7|normal for eight level
9 before buyoff|8|normal for ninth level
8 after buyoff|8|normal for eigth level
9 after buyoff|9|normal for ninth level
10+|10+|as normal for that level[/table]

(Table avoids using actual XP numbers to comply with board rules on non-OGC content.)

Note that you never actually are at “ECL 6 before buyoff” or “ECL 9 before buyoff” for more than the instant it takes you to actually pay the XP. You can pay the XP immediately and don’t have to bother actually adding a new Knight level.
okay.... that makes more sense.... I think

but what about say... an Ogre? they get racial hit die + feats + skill points do you just not get those as a PC? or does LA take this into account? does this make LA "less terrible"?

wondering if I should have started a "question on LA" thread instead :smalltongue:

[Scow2]

...The LA buyoff rules are pretty straighforward.

[Yuki Akuma]

...Racial hit dice count towards ECL. Of course the ogre gets them as a PC.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

Damn. My example was borked. I got thinking the adjustment applies at Class Level + LA = 6 and 9. It’s at class levels 6 and and 9, period. Okay, I’ll go ahead and edit my previous example.


but what about say... an Ogre? they get racial hit die + feats + skill points do you just not get those as a PC? or does LA take this into account? does this make LA "less terrible"?
Though a properly assigned LA should take Racial Hit Dice into account, the buyoff is strictly based upon class levels.

An Ogre with 4 Racial HD and +2 LA would get buyoff at class levels 6 and 9, like a +2 LA bone creature. However, whereas the Bone Creature hits those class levels at ECL 8 and 10 respectively, the Ogre will see them at ECL 12 and 14, because Racial Hit Dice do not factor in.

[big teej]

...The LA buyoff rules are pretty straighforward.

not if you don't know why LA is bad.... which I didn't until a few posts ago.:smalltongue: