LA and RHD: What's the deal?

[Werephilosopher]

Here's something I've been wondering about for a while. As far as I know, both LA and RHD replace a PC's class levels- a "level ten" character playing a race with +2 LA has only eight class levels, a "level 4" character playing a race with 3 RHD has only one class level, etc.
Given this, I don't understand why almost every handbook/optimization thread discourages the use of monsters with multiple RHD while advocating those with LA for player use. Whereas level adjustment gives a character nothing, racial hit dice at least provide HP, skill points, etc. So why is it better to have level adjustment than to have multiple RHD?

[LTwerewolf]

Level adjustment can be bought off, whereas RHD can't. Meaning LA can eventually not be there.

[Werephilosopher]

Level adjustment can be bought off, whereas RHD can't. Meaning LA can eventually not be there.

That's certainly a point for LA, but I feel that can't be the only reason. Not all DMs use LA buyoff, and certain RHD (like Outsider) are good enough some people might not want to lose them.

[LTwerewolf]

That's pretty much the reason. RHD don't come with class features, which matter more than anything. The ability to get those back and have a full level 20 character with no dead levels isn't something to be discounted.

[eggynack]

I don't think there are many situations where RHD are better than class levels, and RHD usually come with a healthy serving of LA anyways. Without buy off, an amount of RHD is probably strictly superior to the same amount of LA, but those are rarely the circumstances in question. What's the particular comparison you're talking about? If everything's in theorycraft mode, you're not actually learning anything about the factors involved.

[Fyermind]

Usually RHD are not accounted for in LA calculations by WotC, so creatures with RHD worth playing also have LA.

Edit: Source chapter 2 of Savage Species

[Thrice Dead Cat]

Usually RHD are not accounted for in LA calculations by WotC, so creatures with RHD worth playing also have LA.

Edit: Source chapter 2 of Savage Species

This is sadly true. Monster Manual 2 and Fiend Folio both have rather large numbers for both RHD and LA on some creatures. More so with MM2 considering the LA/HD breakdown on the ethergaunts, but it was something that WotC never seemed to look at too terribly hard at in regards to PCs.

[Immabozo]

This is sadly true. Monster Manual 2 and Fiend Folio both have rather large numbers for both RHD and LA on some creatures. More so with MM2 considering the LA/HD breakdown on the ethergaunts, but it was something that WotC never seemed to look at too terribly hard at in regards to PCs.

MM II is also, in my opinion, the weakest MM book

[erikun]

That's certainly a point for LA, but I feel that can't be the only reason. Not all DMs use LA buyoff, and certain RHD (like Outsider) are good enough some people might not want to lose them.
LA (in the form of templates) are also generally far, far better than anything you can get from creatures with RHD. You can easily get +1 LA or +2 LA for a very good template, while it is incredibly difficult to find a creature with 2 RHD but +0 LA.

[ericgrau]

Grimlocks are LA 2 and 2 RHD and they get good stats even before considering the blindsight. I've been wanting to play one for a while but I never get the right campaign. I know they're no half-minotaur mineral warrior goliath, but for the types of games I play they'd be nice.

[eggynack]

Grimlocks are LA 2 and 2 RHD and they get good stats even before considering the blindsight. I've been wanting to play one for a while but I never get the right campaign. I know they're no half-minotaur mineral warrior goliath, but for the types of games I play they'd be nice.
I don't really get what you're arguing for here. The grimlock seems fair at two LA, although blindsight might be a bit much for that price alone. It looks like a perfectly average, somewhat overcosted, monster race. The problems with blindsight are that a blindfold of true darkness only costs 9000 GP, and that blindsight doesn't really directly advance the goals of most characters. It's quite powerful, but I don't see it worth spending two levels. The race doesn't seem worth the cost.

[KillianHawkeye]

Grimlocks are LA 2 and 2 RHD and they get good stats even before considering the blindsight. I've been wanting to play one for a while but I never get the right campaign. I know they're no half-minotaur mineral warrior goliath, but for the types of games I play they'd be nice.

Um, what? :smallconfused:

There's no way a standard grimlock is worth giving up 4 actual class levels. Their "good stats" give only a net bonus of 2 points. Their only useful racial ability is blindsight and maybe their natural armor. What else do they have? Immunity to gaze attacks and visual illusions? A bonus to Hide in mountains or underground? Proficiency in battleaxe? Scent? I'm not exactly jumping for joy here.... :smallannoyed::smallsigh:

[Karnith]

Another issue with RHD over LA is that in most games (though not all), monsters with 1 RHD are allowed to "trade" that RHD for a class level. So while you can get LA +1 and have it not set you back in class levels that much, you're generally stuck with a minimum of 2 RHD.

In addition, WotC's fear of monster characters meant that virtually every creature with at least 2 RHD was also saddled with LA; the only exceptions that I can think of are some of the anthropomorphic creatures in Savage Species. Given that low RHD creatures rarely, if ever, get any abilities above some small stat boosts and natural armor, there's really just not an incentive to play as one over just taking on LA for something.

[Maginomicon]

That's certainly a point for LA, but I feel that can't be the only reason. Not all DMs use LA buyoff, and certain RHD (like Outsider) are good enough some people might not want to lose them.
Handbooks are written to a significant extent to benefit Theoretical Optimization (TO). Thus, for convenience, when LA is relevant to the topic they either mention or generally assume that the LA-Buyoff variant is in play (because it's all in theory, so who cares about the reality of it?).

[eggynack]

Handbooks are written to a significant extent to benefit Theoretical Optimization (TO). Thus, for convenience, when LA is relevant to the topic they either mention or generally assume that the LA-Buyoff variant is in play (because it's all in theory, so who cares about the reality of it?).
Where do you get that idea? Most handbooks are written with practical optimization in mind. I don't think that the druid handbook even mentions planar shepherd, and most of Treantmonk's wizard handbook is devoted to practical discussion of various aspects of the class. Sure, handbooks sometimes explain the potential for cheese, but I don't think that it's the norm for any handbook to have most of its space devoted to that topic. In fact, for a more specific thing, the wizard handbook doesn't have any space devoted to discussing races with LA at all, and neither does the druid handbook from what I can see. I think that most handbooks that talk about races with LA specifically talk about how various things get better or worse dependent on LA buyoff. It looks like you're just wrong on this one.

Edit: The druid handbook mentions planar shepherd, but it only has the words "planar shepherd". That handbook even brings up greenbound summoning with the explicit caveat that many DM's ban it. What handbooks are you talking about?

[Karnith]

Handbooks are written to a significant extent to benefit Theoretical Optimization (TO).
I'm not sure that TO means what you think it means. Theoretical Optimization is optimization that is never meant to see play in games (hence "theoretical"). It assumes an inactive/passive DM who will follow RAW to the letter, and generally results in weird things like Pun-Pun or Festering Anger Lad; TO exercises are basically defined by the fact that they are rules-legal, but will virtually never be allowed in games. It stands in contrast to Practical Optimization, which is meant for actual play in games (hence "practical"). PO relies on RAW (as everything must), but also takes into consideration practical table considerations (i.e. no drown-healing, no level draining to remove RHD, no wish loops, and so on) and assumes a sane DM. Virtually every handbook that I can think of is written with PO in mind. LA-buyoff is a pretty commonly-used variant, and it's firmly in the realm of PO.

You seem to be discussing the availability of material in games, which is quite a different matter.

[Telonius]

That's pretty much the reason. RHD don't come with class features, which matter more than anything. The ability to get those back and have a full level 20 character with no dead levels isn't something to be discounted.

Basically, this.

If you're thinking about using a particular race that has RHD, you're trading away class levels for whatever abilities the race and Type will give you. For a Caster, this is almost never going to be worth it. You would need to find something that's worth extra 9th-level spells per day, which is really hard to come by. So when you're talking about RHD, you're almost always going to be talking about melee builds.

There are a couple kinds of RHD (Dragon and Outsider) that a melee-focused character might reasonably consider taking instead of a full 20 levels of classes. Both of Dragon and Outsider have full BAB, all good saves, and a higher number of skill points than most melee classes would typically get. Compare the saves and skill points to whatever you'd get from the class capstone; in a few instances, it might be worth it. Unfortunately, there are relatively few races that have a small-ish number of Outsider or Dragon RHD to choose from.

[ericgrau]

Um, what? :smallconfused:

There's no way a standard grimlock is worth giving up 4 actual class levels. Their "good stats" give only a net bonus of 2 points.
Riiight, because a charisma penalty matters.

The big issue with LA and RHD are the value of the monster "levels" vs. the value of the build levels. So if you're doing high optimization you need to reduce RHD and/or LA across the board to match the new value of a level. It's not that complicated if you stop to think about it and sweeping reductions can be a good way to bring monstrous races back into high optimization.

If you're not doing high optimization then you're giving up a couple feats or similar class features that aren't any better than a couple +1s. Even without blindsight a grimlock barbarian 4 outfights a human barbarian 8 in core or limited optimization. With good planning and playing to their strengths you can do some nice things building around some races. This is some fun that high op campaigns miss out on, and why they could benefit from sweeping LA reductions. But it seems they're too busy sneering the races or sticking to ones they can get cheaper by some optimization trick. Other races are slightly weak even for low op, but reducing their LA by 1 would be too much. They could use a small bump when played by PCs.

More on topic I think high optimization tends to avoid RHD more than pure LA because RHD tends to come with LA too, so the total number is too high for high optimization. Almost nothing out there is crazy enough to justify so many levels for a heavy optimizer. Plus LA buyoff as mentioned; heavy optimizers often assume all the tricks are available.

[Big Fau]

A TO trick that makes RHD not so bad is to let a Wight (preferably one controlled by a friendly cleric) drain your RHD, then intentionally allow the negative levels to become permanent.

Although that results in flying books, which may be hazardous to your health.

[danzibr]

A TO trick that makes RHD not so bad is to let a Wight (preferably one controlled by a friendly cleric) drain your RHD, then intentionally allow the negative levels to become permanent.

Although that results in flying books, which may be hazardous to your health.
Shucks, beat me to it.

Do keep in mind that you can do fun things like a free gestalt with savage progression (ensure the characters pick baddies with similar power though).

[Urpriest]

There are a couple examples of RHD without much LA that are debatably worth it. Anthropomorphic Baleen Whale comes to mind, as does Marrulurk under any sane non-Curmudgeon interpretation. You have to look hard to find such examples though.

[Karnith]

Marrulurk under any sane non-Curmudgeon interpretation
Is this a reference to Sneak Attack stacking, or am I missing something?