Best LA+0 Templates

[Nornalhorst]

What would you say would be the best LA+0 template in your opinion?

For me I would say the Spell Stiched template can't be beat for an undead character.:smallbiggrin:

As a side note any good feats for a lvl 1 Cleric? Assuming you won't be leveling up any time soon.

[ArcturusV]

Scroll scribing. Love it on a low level. Cheap, can increase your spell use per day quite a lot. Loses effectiveness later on when you got the resources to just buy any spells you need (And more slots than you'd use most days). But at low level, always good.

[Alleran]

Unseelie Fey.

[Ellrin]

Spellstitched isn't an LA+0 template, it's a template without an LA, meaning it's not suitable for PCs.

[8wGremlin]

Unseelie Fey.

+1 for the unseele fae

[jywu98]

Vampire Lord. You have to be a vampire though.
EDIT: LA -. Whoops.

[The Viscount]

Necropolitan is fantastic, but you pay for the 0 LA by losing a level. You can overcome it fast enough if you start early.

Primordial Giant is an amazing template, but you have to be a Giant to apply it.

[Alleran]

Vampire Lord. You have to be a vampire though.
Honestly, I don't think even Vampire Lord is worth the +8 LA you're saddled with for a regular vampire (Kobolds can cheat and get Draconic Vampire instead, which is only LA +5 and is better in many ways, but it's still a big hit). Vampire Lords are nigh-impossible to permanently kill, sure. But it's still +8 LA.

[Gildedragon]

Dragonborn of Bahamut is neat

[Story]

Necropolitan is my favorite.

[jywu98]

Necropolitan is my favorite.

They are also not LA +0.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Spellstitched isn't an LA+0 template, it's a template without an LA, meaning it's not suitable for PCs.

Not so, it has crafting rules like magic items, with a significant gold/xp cost to add it to a creature, making it an alternate cost template that PC can definitely acquire during play.

[Siosilvar]

They are also not LA +0.

1 level loss + 1000xp is easy enough to (almost) catch up on thanks to the way XP is given. You do have to be level 3 beforehand, but there's no real LA attached so you can catch up.

[jywu98]

1 level loss + 1000xp is easy enough to (almost) catch up on thanks to the way XP is given. You do have to be level 3 beforehand, but there's no real LA attached so you can catch up.

Actually, the PC may get more experience and end up getting to a higher level before his peers, because xp is a river.

[Andion Isurand]

Magic-Blooded ( -2 Wis, +2 Cha, sorcerer favored class, some other stuff ) and Arctic ( +2 con, -2 cha ) templates from Dragon 306 are pretty nice.

[Nornalhorst]

While not a LA+0 Template I just realized how broken the symbiotic template is you could technically have a demilich replacing the head of a human for a +1 LA.

Of course no sane DM would allow that but still...

[Ellrin]

Not so, it has crafting rules like magic items, with a significant gold/xp cost to add it to a creature, making it an alternate cost template that PC can definitely acquire during play.

I would argue that those crafting rules are there so that PCs can apply it to their undead minions, not so that it can be applied to a PC. Even with the gold and XP costs, it's really powerful for no LA for any character with a decent wisdom score.

[Story]

They are also not LA +0.

Yes it is. It costs 3k XP and 3k GP, but there's no LA. And the costs will quickly lose importance as you reach higher levels.

[jywu98]

Yes it is. It costs 3k XP and 3k GP, but there's no LA. And the costs will quickly lose importance as you reach higher levels.

No it's not. LA - is not the same as LA +0.

[Snowbluff]

Um... if Vamp Lord does not have an LA listed, it is not playable. Right?

[jywu98]

Um... if Vamp Lord does not have an LA listed, it is not playable. Right?

It's LA +0. Or so the Master Template List says.
Nevermind, it's the same thing as Necropolitan (LA -), but without the level loss. Whoops.

[Snowbluff]

It's LA +0. Or so the Master Template List says.

Did not do the research, huh? (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/mm/20021018a)

Rule number 18 about building with Snowbluff: Those are out of date, read the primary source. :smallwink:

Does anyone have a source that disagrees?

So I searched the text for "level" and could not find "level-adjustment". It's not playable. Leadership is banned in about every game I've played or discussed, so it would be not playable for that alone. :smalltongue:

[jywu98]

It is still possible for a character to gain it though. Just like Necropolitan and Spellstiched, both of which do not have LA.

[ArcturusV]

Yup, lists a CR adjustment, +3. But no LA.

If you wanted to make it playable, typically I see CR adjustments being about the same, or less than the LA. So the LA based off that guideline would be at least +3.

Based on templates that list both CR increase and LA increase that I have seen and can recall at the moment.

[jywu98]

Yup, lists a CR adjustment, +3. But no LA.

If you wanted to make it playable, typically I see CR adjustments being about the same, or less than the LA. So the LA based off that guideline would be at least +3.

Based on templates that list both CR increase and LA increase that I have seen and can recall at the moment.

CR is a broken system. Honestly the DM should judge the power level of the template by himself and give it his own LA.

[Snowbluff]

It is still possible for a character to gain it though. Just like Necropolitan and Spellstiched, both of which do not have LA.

Um... Necropolitan has a section on LA.

Even better, it has an actual mechanic for becoming one. I do not see a ritual for Vampire Lord. We have a bunch of requirements, but no mechanic. Do the fairies make you a Lord after you survive your assassination on the Eve of your Hundredth Year?

[jywu98]

Um... Necropolitan has a section on LA.

Even better, it has an actual mechanic for becoming one. I do not see a ritual for Vampire Lord. We have a bunch of requirements, but no mechanic. Do the fairies make you a Lord after you survive your assassination on the Eve of your Hundredth Year?

Perhaps you do not need a ritual to become a vampire lord, you become one when you meet the requirements?
It seems more of an evolution, like the evolved undead template to me. To be fair, a lot of templates have vague mechanics, even some of those with LA.

[Snowbluff]

Perhaps you do not need a ritual to become a vampire lord, you become one when you meet the requirements?
It seems more of an evolution, like the evolved undead template to me. To be fair, a lot of templates have vague mechanics, even some of those with LA.

Even if that was the case, it is in the fluff portion of the article. LM provides a precedent on transformations with Necropolitans by giving up an LA section describing how a character can obtain it. Vampire Lord, does not.

[jywu98]

Even if that was the case, it is in the fluff portion of the article. LM provides a precedent on transformations with Necropolitans by giving up an LA section describing how a character can obtain it. Vampire Lord, does not.

Yeah, I know I'm stretching it. A lot. :smalltongue:
However, one can argue that there are cases where the fluff and crunch aren't completely separate.

[Gavinfoxx]

http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=7044.0

[jywu98]

http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=7044.0

Better save this. BG is gonna go down soon.

[Clistenes]

Scroll scribing. Love it on a low level. Cheap, can increase your spell use per day quite a lot. Loses effectiveness later on when you got the resources to just buy any spells you need (And more slots than you'd use most days). But at low level, always good.

What source does that come from? It seems strange that there is a template for that when you could just take the feat.

[ArcturusV]

He asked, second half of the OP, for good feat options for a cleric at level 1 presuming that he would take a very, very long time to hit higher levels.

[ShurikVch]

Some more LA +0 templates:
Half-Golems (MM2 WE variant)
Proto-Creature (Bestiary of Krynn)
Ghost (Ghostwalk)

[Story]

No it's not. LA - is not the same as LA +0.

It says LA: - (See below)

And then in the description it says

Level Adjustment: Same as the base creature. (Becoming a
necropolitan involves losing a level—see Ritual of Crucimigration,
below—so the advantages of the undead type cancel out
what would other wise be a larger adjustment.)

Only the most pedantic reading of the rules would make the Necropolitan unplayable.


Better save this. BG is gonna go down soon.

Again?

[jywu98]

Some more LA +0 templates:
Half-Golems (MM2 WE variant)
Proto-Creature (Bestiary of Krynn)
Ghost (Ghostwalk)

Half-golems have no LA, which is not quite the same as LA +0.

[ShurikVch]

Half-golems have no LA, which is not quite the same as LA +0.
Your tipical Half-golem have no LA because it's nonsentent. But WE have a variant to apply this template without becoming a construct, as long as you succeed on Will save. DC from 15 (First new limb) to 55 (Sixth new limb).
If the character succeeds at all the required saves, he or she takes on the attributes of a half-golem as described below—except that the character retains his or her alignment, gains a +4 bonus to his or her Constitution score, and does not gain construct traits. As soon as the character fails one of these required saves, he or she becomes a half-golem of neutral evil alignment. A neutral evil half-golem retains the memories and knowledge of its former life, but its personality becomes murderous and cruel. It demonstrates the hatred of flesh creatures common to elementals, and it seeks methods appropriate to its class to slaughter as many flesh creatures as possible. Upon failing the Will save, the character has no Constitution score and gains construct traits. You buy it for gold.

[jywu98]

Again?

Talking about the old BG. Minmax is gonna stay.

[Snowbluff]

Yeah, I know I'm stretching it. A lot. :smalltongue:
However, one can argue that there are cases where the fluff and crunch aren't completely separate.

Okay. That's fine. :smallwink:

How about we go through this and try and find an LA for it? Does anyone have rules for calculating LA?

[ArcturusV]

The only guideline I've seen is the one that he dismissed out of hand. When a Template increases CR, it tends to increase LA by at least that amount. I mean he may say CR is stupid and ignore it, but it suggests a guideline to granting LA to LA-less templates.

[jywu98]

Considering how taking vampire already gives you a huge amount of LA, Vampire Lord shouldn't give too much. The template is strong, but nobody will take it if puts them 9-10 levels behind the party.

[The Viscount]

Vampire Lord adds quite a bit to a character. It seems rather clear that it's just not the sort of thing they meant for a character to have.

[Vaz]

{{scrubbed}}

[Alleran]

Vampire Lord adds quite a bit to a character. It seems rather clear that it's just not the sort of thing they meant for a character to have.
You have to live for a hundred years as a vampire to meet one of the requirements.

That's not the sort of thing a PC can get access to without DM approval (i.e. "I want to play a vampire who's lived for 100+ years, can I?") anyway, unless the campaign spans a long time period.

[jywu98]

Stop lying. If it has no mention of LA, it doesn't change it from the base creature. Unseelie Fey falls into this category as well, despite people saying it's LA--.

Whether it's a typo, or if the creators seriously thought that free 2x Base Fly Speed, Cha and Dex boosts with Charisma keyed abilities were worth the Str and Con reduction, and minor weakness to Iron/Steel early on, I really don't know.

He's correct, actually. LA - templates/races are not suitable for PCs to play. If LA - races/templates are playable, apes, then, would be playable, having a LA of -. However, there is a method to make a PC Spellstitched, and the rules are all there, so a PC can take the Spellstitched template.

Unseelie Fey is in a very gray area. There is no LA on the template itself, which would imply it is unsuitable for PCs to play. The problem is that the statblock of example monster, a 1st level gnome warrior, has the LA listed as +0. The official DMag Compendium errata doesn't fix this either.

[Vaz]

Savage Species, Chapter 10, Templates, Reading a Template, page 112, First heading.

"Missing Entry; If a template lacks one of the following entries, the template uses the base creature's entry in that category."

blah, blah,

Right at the end of the Heading "Reading a Template" on page 114,

"Level Adjustment".

Hence, if a Template is missing an entry for Level Adjustment, you use the creatures base.

Compare that to a Gelatinous Creature

"Level Adjustment: Gelatinous creatures lack the Intelligence to be playable characters, so they have no level adjustment."

or an Effigy Creature

"Level Adjustment: -"

Under Spellstitched Template entry, there's no mention at all of Level Adjustment.

There is no grey area, apart from when you don't know the rules. Hopefully this helps you.

[jywu98]

Keep in mind Savage Species is 3.0, and also not the primary source about monsters.

Here, a bonus SRD quote just to clear things up:
"Monsters suitable for play have a level adjustment given in their statistics."

[Vaz]

1. It was updated to 3.5
2. I didn't have Monster Manual to hand to check it, but I've found the quote in there.


Generally, if a template does not cause a change to a certain statistic, that entry is missing from the template description. For clarity, the entry for a statistic or attribute that is not changed is sometimes given as “Same as the base creature.”

[jywu98]

Nope, SS was never updated.
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/20030718a

Also, judging from your view, the pseudonatural and paragon templates, which both do not have LA, is treated as LA +0? Seems unlikely.

[Vaz]

Pg291; improving monsters.

And yeah, got the updates mixed up. I got SS for Tauric Template, and Tauric Template was updated in MM2 update, always got them two mixed up. Point still stands, however.

[jywu98]

Read the above. I added a point.

[Sgt. Cookie]

While not a LA+0 Template I just realized how broken the symbiotic template is you could technically have a demilich replacing the head of a human for a +1 LA.

Of course no sane DM would allow that but still...

My friend, you would be lucky if that's as broken as Symbiotic gets. This quote by Toy Killer pretty much sums up just how broken it can get:


The day that I learned turning a barbarian into a cloud of flowers (no matter how vicious the flowers are) is a viable and possibly game breaking option is the day that I truly realized that WotC is truly incompetent at the game they designed.

FYI: He's talking about a Dread Blossom Swarm.

[jywu98]

I thought WotC's absolute and utter incompetence was already shown when they released the Truenamer? :smallbiggrin:

[Karnith]

Also, judging from your view, the pseudonatural and paragon templates, which both do not have LA, is treated as LA +0? Seems unlikely.
The (epic-level) pseudonatural and paragon templates both have level adjustments, which are for some reason not listed on the SRD. In the Epic Level Handbook, from which the information in the SRD is derived, their level adjustments are +13 and +11, respectively.

[jywu98]

The pseudonatural and paragon templates both have level adjustments, which are for some reason not listed on the SRD. In the Epic Level Handbook, from which the information in the SRD is derived, their level adjustments are +13 and +11, respectively.

Huh. Scratch that then. Serves me right for relying too much on the SRD.

EDIT: You sure about that? I'm reading the ELH right now, and this is what it doesn't mention LA for both. Perhaps you're confusing with CR?

2nd EDIT: Ah, I see. You subtract the ECL of the troll from the ECL of the pseudonatural troll to get the LA. You do the same to get the LA of paragon.

Still, I still think this quote, "Monsters suitable for play have a level adjustment given in their statistics" makes them unplayable, but that seems to be directly contradicting yours. It seems like RAW is ambiguous or is there something I'm missing?Again.

[IdleMuse]

No-one's mentioned Aquatic yet. I thought I'd add it on for completeness, despite the fact it isn't very powerful. Except in Aquatic campaigns, obviously!

[Story]

Which Aquatic template? The only one I can find is LA+2.

Unless you're talking about the UA thing, which I don't think is technically a template.

[jywu98]

Which Aquatic template? The only one I can find is LA+2.

Unless you're talking about the UA thing, which I don't think is technically a template.

I think the guy meant Amphibious.

[Person_Man]

I think this falls into the LA not specified category, and not LA+0, but it's fun to look at anyway. The Dungeonbred template from Dungeonscape. -1 size, +1 maneuverability if you have a Fly speed, you eat less, +2 vs disease and poison, +4 Str & Con (though you also have to adjust Str down for the size decrease), Improved Natural Attack for every natural weapon you possess, and Endurance. Can be applied to any corporeal aberation, animal, magical beast, or vermin of Large size or bigger.

[killem2]

CR is a broken system. Honestly the DM should judge the power level of the template by himself and give it his own LA.

While true, I don't feel DMs should go right into changing existing rules or classes, or monsters or anything unless it has actually caused an issue.

[nedz]

While true, I don't feel DMs should go right into changing existing rules or classes, or monsters or anything unless it has actually caused an issue.

Well, you could interpret your statement as implying that DM's should re-write vast tracts of the system since the issues are legion.

Monsters though are always setting specific.

[The Viscount]

On the playability of Vampire Lord and Spellstitched, it is worth noting that both were written as 3.0 material, which simply didn't print LA for things. It gave ECL for a select few monsters. The reprint of Spellstitched in Complete Arcane is updated, but there is still no printed LA, which I attribute to carelessness.

[Greenish]

Which Aquatic template? The only one I can find is LA+2.Dragon Magazine #306 had a whole bunch of environmental templates for PC races. Arctic and Magic-Blooded are the most popular ones, and have already been mentioned in the thread, but there's also Aquatic, Deep, Desert, and Wild. Deep is +1 LA, the rest are +0.

[jywu98]

Dragon Magazine #306 had a whole bunch of environmental templates for PC races. Arctic and Magic-Blooded are the most popular ones, and have already been mentioned in the thread, but there's also Aquatic, Deep, Desert, and Wild. Deep is +1 LA, the rest are +0.

They are arguably only for PHB races though.

[danzibr]

Honestly, I don't think even Vampire Lord is worth the +8 LA you're saddled with for a regular vampire (Kobolds can cheat and get Draconic Vampire instead, which is only LA +5 and is better in many ways, but it's still a big hit). Vampire Lords are nigh-impossible to permanently kill, sure. But it's still +8 LA.
What? I googled "3.5 draconic vampire" and got nothing. What is this?

[Vaz]

There is a template in Drsconomicon which allows essentially Vampirism to be applied to a Dragon. I can't remember the specifics, but it allows what a normal Vampire cannot do - be applied to Dragons. Same for Dracolich. I cannot remember their LA however, if they have one, or are -.

[Alleran]

What? I googled "3.5 draconic vampire" and got nothing. What is this?
Draconomicon pages 195-197.

Among other things:

- LA +5.
- Gains a mass charm monster (Su) ability.
- Can survive sunlight for a number of rounds equal to age category.
- Can still be staked, but you need a stake of appropriate size to do it (i.e. a really big one in many cases).
- Not injured by immersion in water.
- Not repelled by garlic or mirrors.
- Can freely cross running water.

They can't enter a home unless they're invited, but the LA is much more palatable than the +8 of the normal vampire template. You basically lose some of the downsides, gain a couple of extra bits and pieces, and still pay less LA overall.

[The Viscount]

They can't enter a home unless they're invited

They're dragons. They'll just burn the house down. It's not like they could enter most homes anyway.

[Greenish]

They're dragons. They'll just burn the house down. It's not like they could enter most homes anyway.Well, the suggestion was to enter with a kobold, and there are few places indeed a kobold can't squeeze through.

[Nornalhorst]

Stop lying. If it has no mention of LA, it doesn't change it from the base creature. Unseelie Fey falls into this category as well, despite people saying it's LA--.

Whether it's a typo, or if the creators seriously thought that free 2x Base Fly Speed, Cha and Dex boosts with Charisma keyed abilities were worth the Str and Con reduction, and minor weakness to Iron/Steel early on, I really don't know.

Unfortunately for me I tried to use the spellstiched template (I have 22 Wisdom) and the DM and all the other players said no.

Lich is definitely not worth it IMO now:smallsigh:.

[ShurikVch]

Spellstitched in CArc and Unseelie fey in errata are LA +1.

Half-ogre is LA +0, if base creature's size larger than medium.

[Seer_of_Heart]

What is the LA of the templates in dragon magazine compendium. I could not find any LA in the templates I checked. Except that Seelie Court Fey is LA-

[Vaz]

If it makes no mention of the LA change, it is unchanged.

[ShurikVch]

Not in the DComp itself, but in the errata. Explicitely called LA +1, but doesn't change a sample creature... :smallconfused: Thus, gnome have LA minus 1 :smallbiggrin:

[Vaz]

No it doesn't.

[ShurikVch]

No it doesn't.
No it doesn't what???

[Lonely Tylenol]

...There's errata for Dragon Magazine Compendium? :smallconfused:

[ShurikVch]

...There's errata for Dragon Magazine Compendium? :smallconfused:
Yes. There (http://paizo.com/download/dragon/compendium/DragonCompendiumVolumeIErrata.pdf).

[Lonely Tylenol]

Yes. There (http://paizo.com/download/dragon/compendium/DragonCompendiumVolumeIErrata.pdf).

"Challenge Rating" is not "Level Adjustment".

[ShurikVch]

"Challenge Rating" is not "Level Adjustment".
Sorry. :smallfrown: Was mistaken. Someone says to me it was corrected... :smallsigh:

[nedz]

Spellstitched in CArc and Unseelie fey in errata are LA +1.

Half-ogre is LA +0, if base creature's size larger than medium.

Spellstitched in CArc is LA — and there is nothing about it in the errata.
If Spellstitched had LA then there are all manner of CharOp tricks I could pull off with it.

[ShurikVch]

Indeed, it haven't. Again confused it with CR...
But it's description fave a line:
Undead with arcane spellcasting abilities can spellstitch themselves.

[jywu98]

If it makes no mention of the LA change, it is unchanged.

Specific trumps general. Your quote talks about all the entries while mine only talks about LA. Mine is more specific and therefore trumps yours.

[nedz]

Indeed, it haven't. Again confused it with CR...
But it's description have a line:

Undead with arcane spellcasting abilities can spellstitch themselves.
LA — just means that it's not suitable for PCs.

Undead NPCs Monsters can use the Template without any issues.

[Vaz]

Better save this. BG is gonna go down soon.


Yeah, I know I'm stretching it. A lot. :smalltongue:
However, one can argue that there are cases where the fluff and crunch aren't completely separate.


Perhaps you do not need a ritual to become a vampire lord, you become one when you meet the requirements?
It seems more of an evolution, like the evolved undead template to me. To be fair, a lot of templates have vague mechanics, even some of those with LA.


CR is a broken system. Honestly the DM should judge the power level of the template by himself and give it his own LA.


It is still possible for a character to gain it though. Just like Necropolitan and Spellstiched, both of which do not have LA.


It's LA +0. Or so the Master Template List says.
Nevermind, it's the same thing as Necropolitan (LA -), but without the level loss. Whoops.


No it's not. LA - is not the same as LA +0.


Actually, the PC may get more experience and end up getting to a higher level before his peers, because xp is a river.


They are also not LA +0.


Vampire Lord. You have to be a vampire though.
EDIT: LA -. Whoops.

What specific quote exactly? These are all your quotes (provided the site works correctly) from within this thread.

Nowhere have you quoted a specific rule or such which states that not mentioning LA is exactly the same LA-. Kindly enlighten. Because currently, you're in the wrong.

I'm not saying a template added to a race with LA- or no mention of it in its stat block is relevant to play. I'm saying that a template with no mention of LA in its statblock does not change that of the base race; if it's LA- then it's LA- +X - you still end up with a LA of -, because - isn't a number; if the race is already +1, and your template is +2, then it's +3. If the race is +1, and the template has no mention of LA, then the LA of the base race doesn't change (a bit like a template not having an entry for Ability scores does not change the ability scores of the base creature), whether that LA itself is -, 0, +X, or unmentioned.

Perhaps you've not comprehended that, leading to your fallacy, or if you've had, I'd be interested to know.

[The Viscount]

Spellstitched in CArc is LA — and there is nothing about it in the errata.
If Spellstitched had LA then there are all manner of CharOp tricks I could pull off with it.
I don't know that I've ever specifically seen Spellstitched written as LA . While the given ghast has an LA of as presented in CArc, so it muddies the waters. I've always seen it with no printed LA, at first due to being 3.0 and in CArc due to some unknown reason. As is, no printed LA still effectively removes it from play.


Half-ogre is LA +0, if base creature's size larger than medium.

While this may be true, I don't know of any LA+0 Large races.

[Greenish]

While this may be true, I don't know of any LA+0 Large races.Anthropomorphic Baleen Whale. 3 RHD, though.

[8wGremlin]

Anthropomorphic Baleen Whale. 3 RHD, though.

I hate clever people... who hide **** comments; they only give you half the truth...

[CIDE]

I hate clever people... who hide **** comments; they only give you half the truth...

Where's the "like" button?

[nedz]

I don't know that I've ever specifically seen Spellstitched written as LA

CArc p162

I'm not hiding anything clever here, it's just that my post was too short.

[Nornalhorst]

CArc p162

I'm not hiding anything clever here, it's just that my post was too short.

What is CArc?

[TaiLiu]

What is CArc?

It stands for Complete Arcane. It's a DnD 3.5 book.

[Greenish]

This (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18512) should prove to be useful.

[babus]

Anthropomorphic Baleen Whale. 3 RHD, though.

There's also the option of Incarnate Construct to create such a creature. Not sure what you'd use as the base, though.

[jywu98]

I'm gonna purposely miss all your relevant quotes on page 2, because if I quote you there I'll be wrong.
Good to know.

Here's tl;dr about the argument we just had for you:
You claim that no LA equals LA +0.
I claim that no La equals LA -.
I pull out MM quote: Monsters that are meant to be played will have LA in statistics.
You pull out MM quote that contradicts mine: If a template does not cause a change in the entry, that entry is missing.
I say that since mine is more specific as it only talks about LA, so it trumps your quote.
You accuse me of committing a fallacy.

[The Viscount]

Anthropomorphic Baleen Whale. 3 RHD, though.

Silly me, I should have said +0 ECL


CArc p162

While the presented Ghast does have LA -, Ghasts also have an LA of -, so can it really be determined which makes it unplayable? CArc is I believe before LM, which makes ghasts playable.

[ShurikVch]

While this may be true, I don't know of any LA+0 Large races. Take a Furbolg or Jungle Troll from Warcraft (both 1 HD, LA +1), make "Lesser" variant by PGF rules, will got a large ECL 1 character.

[nedz]

While the presented Ghast does have LA -, Ghasts also have an LA of -, so can it really be determined which makes it unplayable? CArc is I believe before LM, which makes ghasts playable.

I was talking about Spellstitched, however.

I am confused by your statement on Ghasts ?

Option A — They have LA —
Option B — They have LA —
:smallconfused:

What is their LA entry in LM ?

[Vaz]

Good to know.

Here's tl;dr about the argument we just had for you:
You claim that no LA equals LA +0.
I claim that no La equals LA -.
I pull out MM quote: Monsters that are meant to be played will have LA in statistics.
You pull out MM quote that contradicts mine: If a template does not cause a change in the entry, that entry is missing.
I say that since mine is more specific as it only talks about LA, so it trumps your quote.
You accuse me of committing a fallacy.

Templates are not monsters. Your quote makes no mentions of templates and is therefore irrelevant. There is no specific rule you mentioned that calls out TEMPLATES and it is your lack of comprehension or wilful ignorance regarding the rules, as yours specifies monsters LA and mine specifies Templates LA, there is no comparison. In the improving monsters section, it would have said that a lack of LA ona template resulted in it becoming unplayable.

Regarding the Unseelie Fey the sample creature, a LA0 gnome is still la0 and therefore playable. Unless you can prove that no LA = LA- your 'ruling' is quite frankly in lala land, and little more than DM judgement. While I agree that many templates like Unsselie fey and spellstitched are very powerful and the costs explained away in backstory for the latter, and i personally wouldn't allow either unless it was a) integral and b) if applied, done so in game. That is beside the point however, RAW states the no la = no change in la.

[jywu98]

Templates are not monsters. Your quote makes no mentions of templates and is therefore irrelevant. There is no specific rule you mentioned that calls out TEMPLATES and it is your lack of comprehension or wilful ignorance regarding the rules, as yours specifies monsters LA and mine specifies Templates LA, there is no comparison. In the improving monsters section, it would have said that a lack of LA ona template resulted in it becoming unplayable.

Regarding the Unseelie Fey the sample creature, a LA0 gnome is still la0 and therefore playable. Unless you can prove that no LA = LA- your 'ruling' is quite frankly in lala land, and little more than DM judgement. While I agree that many templates like Unsselie fey and spellstitched are very powerful and the costs explained away in backstory for the latter, and i personally wouldn't allow either unless it was a) integral and b) if applied, done so in game. That is beside the point however, RAW states the no la = no change in la.

Templates are a part of a monster, is it not? And no, yours does not specify template LA, it specifies a template in general. And by RAW, the entry for a statistic or attribute that is not changed is sometimes given as “Same as the base creature.” I don't see why they can print this out in other entries, but just can't do it for the LA entry (see Dungeonbred. "CR: Same as base creature"). I'm done here. This are all the facts. Ignore them if you want. Heck, claim it's RAW if you want. See if anybody will take you seriously.

Oh, and the 2 ELH handbook templates. From your "interpretation", both pseudonatural and paragon would lack LA as the entry is not present. However, this is not true. They lack the LA entry, and still have an adjusted LA that is not the same as the base creature.

[Vaz]

I am afb right now, but IIRC didnt someone say to you that the SRD doesn't post the LA but the ELH does? AFB for a bit now so cannot check.

Templates are not a monster. They are an improvement to a monster. you cannot play a template by itself. you must choose a base creature to apply it to, and as the quote specofically dealing with LA in a section referring explicitly to Templates, which are APPLIED to monsters as an Improvement and therefore an exception to the norm and therefore more specific than a catch all term, you proceed to ignore that LA is unchanged from the base monster

Like I said, I am AFB so I cannot check specifics, but I'm fairly sure there are numerous templates and racial variants which modify the base creature without recurrence to certain other stat block entries.

{Scrubbed}

[jywu98]

I am afb right now, but IIRC didnt someone say to you that the SRD doesn't post the LA but the ELH does? AFB for a bit now so cannot check.

Templates are not a monster. They are an improvement to a monster. you cannot play a template by itself. you must choose a base creature to apply it to, and as the quote specofically dealing with LA in a section referring explicitly to Templates, which are APPLIED to monsters as an Improvement and therefore an exception to the norm and therefore more specific than a catch all term, you proceed to ignore that LA is unchanged from the base monster

Like I said, I am AFB so I cannot check specifics, but I'm fairly sure there are numerous templates and racial variants which modify the base creature without recurrence to certain other stat block entries.

As for your comment to see if anyone takes me seriously, I'm guessing you have extremely different friendship circles to myself. Nothing of what you have stated counters my own proof. blind ignorance doesn't make it any more true, but if there is an alternate rule elsewhere that both of us have missed, feel free to bring it up.

Otherwise; stop lying to people and confusing the matter.

No, you're the one lying to yourself. Have fun doing that. It seems that you're dead-set that no LA entry means LA +0. So explain this: Why is it not consistent? Why do some templates have LA +0 when the developers can simply not put the entry there? Why would spellstitched have a lower LA adjustment than CR, considering the fact that LA adjustments are, most of the time, higher than CR adjustments? Explain this instead of ignoring every piece of evidence I have presented, and you may actually have a point.

By the way, the ELH LA has to be calculated on your own. I believe I have mentioned it on one of my posts, but it seems you ignored it. How unsurprising.

[Vaz]

So, youbare basing it on RAI. Nice to know where you are coming from.

Like I said, I am AFB right now; so cannot check. As for the ELH, I can assure despite your ad hominem, that I selected multiquote, if it missed, it was either in genuine error, OR the site messed up. Kindly be so good as to quote yourself to prove how correct you are.

Because quite frankly nothing you have stated is based in the rules, or is completely supreceded.

Edit found it, cant quote because I am on my phone. However if the LA isn't stated in the entry then by my interpretration, RAW f#'s up. Yet again. You see, I'm not sure if you had noticed in your rush to prove RAI over RAW, but we have something called the Dysfunctional Rule thread. Have a look in Complete Warrior for example; theres a PrC whose primary ability is to quicken a spell without changing casting time.

Spellstitched can only be applied to Undead IIRC; there very few Undead Playable Races I can think of, most having LA and/or RHD (and even Necropolitan costa you a level). However the Infinately Evolved Spellstitched Necropolitan Incarnate Dustform was used in my Iron Chef last round. It is hardly new.

Unseelie Fey; like you say Wizards Incompetence has already been showcased. The fact you imagine the RAI to be something utterly different is irregardless of the fact that RAW supports myself, and not yours. The same with Paragon; although that is sorted by mathematics, applying the same rule to Unseelie Fey gets LA0. And you also missed the part in my quote where it states "sometimes", not "if its missing it is completely and utterly unplayable" as a PC.

[jywu98]

I HAVE NO OTHER POINTS SO IT'S TIME FOR ME TO ACCUSE HIM OF GOING BY RAI, EVEN THOUGH HE ISN'T.
That's wonderful.

Oh, and by the way, it's not ad hominem, considering how you ignored my statements before. Don't worry, I've gotten used to you being wrong now. You're AFB, without the ELH, and you're trying to tell me, with the ELH, that somehow an ECL table is RAI? And don't give me the "Text trumps table" crap, because there is no text regarding LA in the entries.

[killem2]

That's wonderful.

Oh, and by the way, it's not ad hominem, considering how you ignored my statements before. Don't worry, I've gotten used to you being wrong now. You're AFB, without the ELH, and you're trying to tell me, with the ELH, that somehow an ECL table is RAI? And don't give me the "Text trumps table" crap, because there is no text regarding LA in the entries.

I got my posters wrong, and quoted the wrong person. but I'm sure you can use this too :D.

If you read the entry in the monster manual it states to get ecl you add to class levels. You can't add — to 3 or 17 or 35. You can add 0 though.

Also page 200 of the dmg 3.5, address creature that do not have a level adjustment (the —).

http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/8855/lanone.png

Now, take that as you will and I don't mean RAI, I mean, it's pretty clear that the game didn't intend for people to take level adjustment — races/monsters because they just were not easily compatible. That doesn't mean it isn't allowed.

[jywu98]

I got my posters wrong, and quoted the wrong person. but I'm sure you can use this too :D.

If you read the entry in the monster manual it states to get ecl you add to class levels. You can't add — to 3 or 17 or 35. You can add 0 though.

Also page 200 of the dmg 3.5, address creature that do not have a level adjustment (the —).

http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/8855/lanone.png

Huh, thanks for the quote. It strengthens my argument that templates without LA were not mean for PCs.

[Vaz]

That's where we differ.

My opinion is that a Template is not a monster, yours is that a Template is a monster. Until there's a definite answer either way, it will remain unresolved.

[The Viscount]

Take a Furbolg or Jungle Troll from Warcraft (both 1 HD, LA +1), make "Lesser" variant by PGF rules, will got a large ECL 1 character.
Have Jungle Trolls or Furbolgs been officially statted out somewhere? The Lesser races presented in PGF give no indication of how to make it into a generalized template.

I was talking about Spellstitched, however.

I am confused by your statement on Ghasts ?

Option A — They have LA —
Option B — They have LA —
:smallconfused:

What is their LA entry in LM ?

I'm sorry. I'm not communicating myself very well. What I mean to say was that the spellstitched template does not give an LA as listed in either MMII and Complete Arcane. The sample spellstitched Ghast in Complete Arcane has an LA of -. However, the Ghast as presented in MMI has and LA of -. Thus it is impossible to tell whether the LA of - of the spellstitched Ghast is because the spellstitched template has an LA of -, or whether it is because all Ghasts have LA of -, and - plus anything is -. I hope that was clearer.
Ghasts aren't exactly presented with an LA in LM, but the Ghast monster class is given. The class is 8 levels long and gives 4 HD, so based off of that I said Ghasts have an LA of 4. Is this illegal or some abuse of the rules?

[nedz]

Aah,
I went to check in the MM2 Errata, only there isn't one. There is an MM2 3.5 Conversion document though, and this is what I found :-


Spellstitched Creature: Undead; 5 ft./5 ft.; 1–3 HD: 5/silver, 4–7 HD: 5/magic, 8–11 HD: 5/magic silver, 12+ HD: 10/magic silver; (see ghast in the Monster Manual:) Balance +7, Climb +9, Hide +8, Jump +9, Move Silently +8, Spot +8; Multiattack, Toughness; LA —; Note that the ghast is significantly changed in the Monster Manual. Reapply this template to the revised ghast or any other corporeal undead creature. Saves: A spellstitched creature gains a +2 profane bonus on all saving throws.

The language though is a little confused. I think that this is the base template, but the comments indicate that this both is, and is not, the sample Ghast :smallconfused:

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: Locked for review.