Sapient = can take class levels?

[Ashtagon]

If it's sapient (int 3+), it can be advanced by character class.

I often see this thrown about, but does anyone actually have a cite for it?

[Kelb_Panthera]

Off the top of my head, I think it's in Savage Species somewhere in the first chapter.

[TuggyNE]

I often see this thrown about, but does anyone actually have a cite for it?

There's some support for it in Improving Monsters (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/improvingMonsters.htm):
Each of the monster entries describes a typical creature of its kind. However, there are several methods by which extraordinary or unique monsters can be created using a typical creature as the foundation: by adding character classes, increasing a monster’s Hit Dice, or by adding a template to a monster. These methods are not mutually exclusive—it’s possible for a monster with a template to be improved by both increasing its Hit Dice and adding character class levels.

Class Levels
Intelligent creatures that are reasonably humanoid in shape most commonly advance by adding class levels. Creatures that fall into this category have an entry of "By character class" in their Advancement line. When a monster adds a class level, that level usually represents an increase in experience and learned skills and capabilities.

Increased Hit Dice
Intelligent creatures that are not humanoid in shape, and nonintelligent monsters, can advance by increasing their Hit Dice. Creatures with increased Hit Dice are usually superior specimens of their race, bigger and more powerful than their run-of-the-mill fellows.

Because of the "non-exclusive" phrasing, and the very general qualifications, it's reasonable to believe that a great many monsters are eligible for this. Combine this with the note further along that "if a creature acquires a character class, it follows the rules for multiclass characters", and you get basically the statement as phrased, given that multiclass characters need human-like intelligence.

There are probably some other sources, but that's the Core support I'm aware of.

[HunterOfJello]

It's mentioned in Savage Species as a rule for building Monster Characters.


The following general rules apply to building any monster
character.

-The base creature must have an Intelligence score of 3 or higher. A creature with an Intelligence score lower than 3 cannot have levels in any class. (The awaken spell can be used to give an animal or plant an Intelligence score of 3 or higher. Also, an animal with the celestial or fiendish template gains an Intelligence score of 3.)

Savage Species generally set the bar at 'you can play any monster race, but it'll have limitations'.

~

I don't know if there's anywhere that says, "You can play anything with Int 3 or higher that doesn't have LA -". However, most people consider it that way.

[Ashtagon]

SRD:


Class Levels
Intelligent creatures that are reasonably humanoid in shape most commonly advance by adding class levels. Creatures that fall into this category have an entry of "By character class" in their Advancement line. When a monster adds a class level, that level usually represents an increase in experience and learned skills and capabilities.

The sentence I highlighted seems quite clear that Int>=3 isn't the primary criterion, but rather that having it explicitly stated in the statblock is.

Savage Species:

Page 9 notes that any class-levelled creature being created using the rules in chapter two must have Intelligence 3+. It does not say the statement in the SRD (highlighted in this post) can be ignored.

I quite agree that the Savage Species ruling on Intelligence is a necessity for any PC race, simply on playability grounds; it's hard to role-play a muppet or vegetable effectively. However, I can't find anything that removes the clearly-stated rules in the SRD that the monster type must also specifically advance by character class.


By way of analogy, The Complete Chef says cornflour can soak up water. The Complete Mason notes that shredded cardboard can soak up water. The fact that The Complete Mason doesn't mention the water-absorbent properties of cornflour doesn't mean that cornflour can't soak up water. The two books simply had different focuses.

[Kelb_Panthera]

I have to admit that this may be one of those houserules that has become so common and ubiquitous that the fact it is a houserule has been forgotten.

I am pretty sure WotC has posted some dragons with class levels on their site, and dragons all have advancement by HD. Likewise, in spite of that advancement entry Draconomicon gives suggestions about adding class levels to dragons and all three of the printed sources mentioned thus far gives dragons a LA.

[Flickerdart]

SRD:

You realize that your quote is not restrictive, right? It says that intelligent, humanoid-ish creatures usually advance by character level. It doesn't say ONLY intelligent, humanoid-ish creatures advance by character level, nor does it imply it at all.

[Ashtagon]

You realize that your quote is not restrictive, right? It says that intelligent, humanoid-ish creatures usually advance by character level. It doesn't say ONLY intelligent, humanoid-ish creatures advance by character level, nor does it imply it at all.

Perhaps. It does say, "Creatures that fall into this category have an entry of "By character class" in their Advancement line." That seems fairly hard to interpret any way other than the way I have though.

[Flickerdart]

Yes, creatures with "Advances by character class" in their statblock fall into the category of creatures that usually advance by character class, in the same way that polar bears fall into the category of bears. But there are other kinds of bears, and there are also other kinds of monsters that can be given class levels, and Savage Species tells us which those are.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Perhaps. It does say, "Creatures that fall into this category have an entry of "By character class" in their Advancement line." That seems fairly hard to interpret any way other than the way I have though.

I could maybe buy that interpretation, but there are plenty of creatures with LA that have an advancement by HD entry and cannon examples of creatures that have an advancement by HD entry with class levels.

If it can't be advanced by character class, why give it a LA?

The lack of the word "only" in your quote keeps it from being an exclusive statement in the face of other rules and advice that directly contradicts it.

Either it was never meant as an absolute, or it's an error.

[Ashtagon]

I could maybe buy that interpretation, but there are plenty of creatures with LA that have an advancement by HD entry and cannon examples of creatures that have an advancement by HD entry with class levels.

If it can't be advanced by character class, why give it a LA?

Monsters intended to be Cohorts canonically have a level adjustment, which is required in order to remain balanced for normally-levelled cohorts (such as PC race cohorts). There's nothing in the cohort rules that say they should then be able to gain levels (gain XP yes, but not gain levels).

[Kelb_Panthera]

Monsters intended to be Cohorts canonically have a level adjustment, which is required in order to remain balanced for normally-levelled cohorts (such as PC race cohorts). There's nothing in the cohort rules that say they should then be able to gain levels (gain XP yes, but not gain levels).

In the case of a creature that's only available as a cohort the LA is usually followed by "(cohort)."

And that still doesn't answer why, if nothing else, dragons are explicitly given advice for adding character leves in draconomicon even though they have advancement by HD with no mention of character class on that line in their stat-blocks.

[Maquise]

I would also like to point out at least one other example of a monster advancing by character levels: The aboleth (which is neither humanoid nor I imagine intended as a cohort) is shown advanced by wizard levels.

[TuggyNE]

Perhaps. It does say, "Creatures that fall into this category have an entry of "By character class" in their Advancement line." That seems fairly hard to interpret any way other than the way I have though.

I actually referred to the answer earlier, but I suppose you missed it. Just before that paragraph it says, "These methods are not mutually exclusive—it’s possible for a monster with a template to be improved by both increasing its Hit Dice and adding character class levels."

If you took the interpretation that [only] creatures that have Advancement: By character class can take class levels, you run into the problem that there is then no way for those monsters to legally advance by RHD (using a very similar interpretation), which is explicitly allowed — and vice versa.