Weakest Races

[Milo v3]

What sort of races are weak enough that they theoretically could be LA -1? Non-Races of the Dragon Kobolds and Half-Orcs spring to mind but what else?

[LOTRfan]

Half-Elf.

Xvarts.

I'm sure there are others, too.

[Cuaqchi]

Actually I wouldn't put either of those at a potential -1 LA. For that I would look for at least all three mental attributes if not CON as well with negative mods and few if any abilities (which themselves can be replicated by a spell or feat available to any character at or before level 2).

Remember at LA -1 you are a second level anything when other characters start. That means spellcasters have more spells and are closer to the next level, fighter types have more hit points/saves/BAB and other classes have more of their tricks as well. So to balance that you need to lower everything that would be benefited by a second free level of any class.

[mythmonster2]

In my inexperienced opinion, I would say Earth Kobolds from Unearthed Arcana are pretty bad. -2 Str, -2 Con, for Stability and +4 on Craft (Trapmaking). Oh, wait, that bonus only applies to stone traps.

[emeraldstreak]

Don't be silly. LA -1 is huge for casters.

[Milo v3]

Half-Elf.

Xvarts.

I'm sure there are others, too.
What are Xvarts from?


Remember at LA -1 you are a second level anything when other characters start. That means spellcasters have more spells and are closer to the next level, fighter types have more hit points/saves/BAB and other classes have more of their tricks as well. So to balance that you need to lower everything that would be benefited by a second free level of any class.
I'm not actually making them be LA -1, this is part of a world building thing I'm doing. I'm merely seeing which races I could put an LA +1 template to and have them about as powerful as a LA +0 race.

So instead of Half-Orcs just being half-orc, they might all have the Feral or Symbiotic template.

[eggynack]

What are Xvarts from?


I'm not actually making them be LA -1, this is part of a world building thing I'm doing. I'm merely seeing which races I could put an LA +1 template to and have them about as powerful as a LA +0 race.

So instead of Half-Orcs just being half-orc, they might all have the Feral or Symbiotic template.
I don't think that really works out in most cases. A race would basically have to be actively detrimental to a character to have this system make sense. For example, half-elves with an LA +1 template would be essentially strictly better than that LA +1 template on its own. Similarly, the strength boost is usually going to be worth the penalty on two stats on any character who wants it, at least to the extent that the end race would give a net benefit to the template. These races aren't good enough to usually be taken (except on a druid, who might go half-orc sometimes for those sweet substitution levels) but they're not nearly bad enough to justify an LA of -1.

[bekeleven]

As long as a race has some advantages, players can play to those.

I'm sure plenty of races could be -4 if used in the absolutely wrong way. A -4 or -6 CHA race played as a straight Sorcerer or what have you.

But -1 in all cases? That will be harder.

[Roguenewb]

I think there are plenty of Race/Template combinations that could work out at 0 LA. LA is wildly overcosted in almost every case. The WotC writers for 3.5 hated monster characters, and it shows. Pretty much anything but an LA 0 base race is a terrible idea.

Magic-Blooded Half-Elf is probably an LA 0 race. A feral half-orc is probably okay in a level 1 party. A draconic default kobold is most likely fine. And so on.

[bekeleven]

feral half-orcDepending on how you read its "hit dice" scaling I would be really, really cautious about this.

[Roguenewb]

Depending on how you read its "hit dice" scaling I would be really, really cautious about this.

You're not wrong. Feral is...good. Isn't it partly because it uses the word Pounce which is way better in 3.5 than it was in 3.0?

[awa]

feral half orc is going to be an unstoppable monster in melee.
Dumb as dirt but fast heal, +6 nat armor, +6 str he will wipe the floor with any other melee character

[dysprosium]

What are Xvarts from?

They are originally monsters from 1st edition -- blue skinned, large sloping forheads, mostly described a pathetic goblinoid-esque creatures.

I forget the racial stats for the 3.5 update which I believe was a Dragon Magazine (315 maybe?) but the Level Adjustment for it is -1.

[Aegis013]

You're not wrong. Feral is...good. Isn't it partly because it uses the word Pounce which is way better in 3.5 than it was in 3.0?

Possibly, the description of the Pounce ability in Savage Species doesn't really align with the definition in 3.5, it just says "If a feral creature leaps upon a foe during the first round of combat, it can make a full attack even though it has already moved." This means that it is only usable on the first round of combat as well, making it more easily mitigated than the typical ways to get Pounce (Spirit Lion totem Barb dip, Psionic Lion's Charge, etc).

Really Feral is amazing just because it gives you so much "improved beatstick" for its cost.

[Segev]

They are originally monsters from 1st edition -- blue skinned, large sloping forheads, mostly described a pathetic goblinoid-esque creatures.

I forget the racial stats for the 3.5 update which I believe was a Dragon Magazine (315 maybe?) but the Level Adjustment for it is -1.

If these are the "psionic goblins," in 3.5, they're called "blues" and they have a +1 LA that isn't worth it.

[Flickerdart]

Don't be silly. LA -1 is huge for casters.
You can't actually have negative LA, so there's no way to add a class level there. You have to offset the LA with other templates before you start being a creature, or lose it.

[dysprosium]

If these are the "psionic goblins," in 3.5, they're called "blues" and they have a +1 LA that isn't worth it.

No I meant xvart. They are bluish, goblinish, small pathetic humanoids.

http://www.canonfire.com/wiki/images/8/85/Xvart03.jpg

The above picture is from the 3.5 update of this classic 1st edition creature from Dragon 339.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/77/Xvart.JPG

The above picture is from the 1st edition Fiend Folio.

I know of the blue, the psionic goblin, and that is an entirely different creature than the one that was mentioned earlier in the thread and what I had previously described.

[Roguenewb]

God do psionic goblins suck. Like hardcore. Why are races other than human soooooo bad? Someone should overhaul all the damn terrible races.

[Venger]

What sort of races are weak enough that they theoretically could be LA -1? Non-Races of the Dragon Kobolds and Half-Orcs spring to mind but what else?

half-orc. -2 int/cha for +2 str? that's totally worth a feat and a skill at every level

[danzibr]

Keep in mind most of the bonuses from Feral require "monster HD."

[Chronos]

Quoth Flickerdart:

You can't actually have negative LA, so there's no way to add a class level there. You have to offset the LA with other templates before you start being a creature, or lose it.
So take White Dragonspawn.

And if you ever played Baldur's Gate, I think there was a xvart NPC you encountered (one of the Larry, Darryl and Darryl trio).

[Person_Man]

There are no races that are so bad that they're worth a class level, and there are no races that are currently LA 0 that are so good that they're worth adding +1 LA and giving up a class level. In fact, the vast bulk of +1 LA races and templates out there are worth less then a class level. Maybe mineral warrior, feral, white dragonspawn, and few other more obscure ones. But even then, there are situations where a class level would be more powerful. I'd rather have a Druid 17 instead of a Feral Druid 16. (9th level spells, 17 HD Wildshape forms).

[Segev]

There are no races that are so bad that they're worth a class level, and there are no races that are currently LA 0 that are so good that they're worth adding +1 LA and giving up a class level. In fact, the vast bulk of +1 LA races and templates out there are worth less then a class level. Maybe mineral warrior, feral, white dragonspawn, and few other more obscure ones. But even then, there are situations where a class level would be more powerful. I'd rather have a Druid 17 instead of a Feral Druid 16. (9th level spells, 17 HD Wildshape forms).
To be fair, a +1 LA would be bought off LONG before you got to ECL 17. (And would delay you by something like 3k exp at most. That's what, 2-4 encounters at high level?)

[Feint's End]

God do psionic goblins suck. Like hardcore. Why are races other than human soooooo bad? Someone should overhaul all the damn terrible races.

well they are actually ok if you ignore the printing mistake which put them at +1 la

[Chronos]

If you ignore the Blue's +1 LA, they're not "ok", they're overpowered. Grey elves are bad enough, and blues are even better wizards than grey elves.

[danzibr]

To be fair, a +1 LA would be bought off LONG before you got to ECL 17. (And would delay you by something like 3k exp at most. That's what, 2-4 encounters at high level?)
LA buyoff is an optional rule. I don't allow it as a DM.

[Feint's End]

If you ignore the Blue's +1 LA, they're not "ok", they're overpowered. Grey elves are bad enough, and blues are even better wizards than grey elves.

Strongly disagree .... it just makes them viable as a race. They are still worse than Humans and Strongheart Halflings.

[bekeleven]

Keep in mind most of the bonuses from Feral require "monster HD."
I've already mentioned this. And it's not "most". The special attacks (grab, pounce, etc) scale with "monster Hit Dice". The special qualities scale with "Hit Dice", which is a far more ambiguous term in 3.0 - honestly not sure whether they count. Meanwhile, the speed boost, 1D8 claws, +4 STR, +2 Con, and +2 Wis are of course given regardless.

[Roguenewb]

There are no races that are so bad that they're worth a class level, and there are no races that are currently LA 0 that are so good that they're worth adding +1 LA and giving up a class level. In fact, the vast bulk of +1 LA races and templates out there are worth less then a class level. Maybe mineral warrior, feral, white dragonspawn, and few other more obscure ones. But even then, there are situations where a class level would be more powerful. I'd rather have a Druid 17 instead of a Feral Druid 16. (9th level spells, 17 HD Wildshape forms).

I agree in concept. There's no race that should let you be a Wizard 2 at ECL 1, and I don't think any of the races at LA 0 should be LA +1 (though humans are close). But I honestly believe that there might be some races that should be LA 0 when combined with a LA 1 template. Most races are just such trash, and almost no templates are worth a class level, so there must be combinations of template LA 1 and race LA 0 that are honestly worth LA 0 overall. And that;s not even counting combos that are just antisynergistic so that they equal out to no changes.

[eggynack]

I agree in concept. There's no race that should let you be a Wizard 2 at ECL 1, and I don't think any of the races at LA 0 should be LA +1 (though humans are close). But I honestly believe that there might be some races that should be LA 0 when combined with a LA 1 template. Most races are just such trash, and almost no templates are worth a class level, so there must be combinations of template LA 1 and race LA 0 that are honestly worth LA 0 overall. And that;s not even counting combos that are just antisynergistic so that they equal out to no changes.
This has nothing to do with the LA +0 race. There are only two ways that such a system would make any kind of sense. The first is that the LA +0 race is actively harmful to a character, to the point where it plus a given LA +1 template is worse than the LA +1 template on its own. This is pretty much never going to happen, because most races are at least neutral. The second is that the LA +1 template should really be an LA +0 template, which is a far more reasonable position to take. If you just say that a given LA +0 race should be LA -1, because it's about at parity with humans when you bring a crappy template into the mix, then you ignore other occasions where that template is a mineral warrior instead, and making the LA +0 makes no sense. If this should be done at all, it either has to be done from the template end, or it has to be done from both ends at once. Doing it from the purely racial end doesn't really work.

[Scow2]

Off the top of my head... Gnolls, and maybe other High-HD beatsticks that don't get anything for a bag of hitpoints inferior to an equivalent number of class levels.

Nothing without RHD needs a -1 LA.

This has nothing to do with the LA +0 race. There are only two ways that such a system would make any kind of sense. The first is that the LA +0 race is actively harmful to a character, to the point where it plus a given LA +1 template is worse than the LA +1 template on its own. This is pretty much never going to happen, because most races are at least neutral. The second is that the LA +1 template should really be an LA +0 template, which is a far more reasonable position to take. If you just say that a given LA +0 race should be LA -1, because it's about at parity with humans when you bring a crappy template into the mix, then you ignore other occasions where that template is a mineral warrior instead, and making the LA +0 makes no sense. If this should be done at all, it either has to be done from the template end, or it has to be done from both ends at once. Doing it from the purely racial end doesn't really work.It's not that most races are Statistically Neutral - it's that one level of a Full Caster class is horribly broken regardless of who it's applied to. Some templates that are worth +1 LA on a truly neutral race bring another race - such as a one with negative net attributes and no racial features - up to +0 Par.

Mineral Warrior is broken, and doesn't count.

[eggynack]

It's not that most races are Statistically Neutral - it's that one level of a Full Caster class is horribly broken regardless of who it's applied to. Some templates that are worth +1 LA on a truly neutral race bring another race - such as a one with negative net attributes and no racial features - up to +0 Par.

Mineral Warrior is broken, and doesn't count.
Actually, it is the thing I said. It's been stated a lot of times that the extra LA can only be applied to templates, so the only relevant factor is that a +1 template is generally innately better than LA +0 races. More importantly, some LA +1 templates are better, and that's all that matters. Mineral warrior is just a somewhat extreme example. Given that the OP was talking about symbiotic and feral, it seems fine to talk about powerful templates.

[Person_Man]

I agree in concept. There's no race that should let you be a Wizard 2 at ECL 1, and I don't think any of the races at LA 0 should be LA +1 (though humans are close). But I honestly believe that there might be some races that should be LA 0 when combined with a LA 1 template. Most races are just such trash, and almost no templates are worth a class level, so there must be combinations of template LA 1 and race LA 0 that are honestly worth LA 0 overall. And that;s not even counting combos that are just antisynergistic so that they equal out to no changes.

So you could just use generic race rules.

Every player gets 3 starting Feats. Race confers no bonuses or penalties of any kind, other then roleplaying fluff.

Now create a line of homebrew Feats which confer commonly sought after racial abilities, and do away with fiddly bonuses.

[Chronos]

Three feats is probably too much, unless they can only be spent on the limited set of "racial ability feats". After all, humans are generally considered a good race, and one of their racial traits is a feat, and the other (+1 skill point per level) can be gotten from a feat (Nymph's Kiss, which also has a couple other benefits). Oh, and Favored Class (Any), but between single-classed characters, characters who would be their favored class anyway, and tables that just ignore that rule, that's really not relevant very often. So the total racial features of a good race should be worth about 1 1/2 feats.

eggynack, what do you mean by comparing a race to a "template on its own"? Do you mean, compared to what the template would look like on an otherwise completely generic medium humanoid with no other racial traits? And saying that something only makes sense with "races that hurt the character" isn't very strong, since the vast majority of races do hurt the character in some way (if nothing else, by penalizing an ability score). And there are some races with pretty hefty penalties, too, like non-RotD, non-UA kobolds.

[eggynack]

eggynack, what do you mean by comparing a race to a "template on its own"? Do you mean, compared to what the template would look like on an otherwise completely generic medium humanoid with no other racial traits? And saying that something only makes sense with "races that hurt the character" isn't very strong, since the vast majority of races do hurt the character in some way (if nothing else, by penalizing an ability score). And there are some races with pretty hefty penalties, too, like non-RotD, non-UA kobolds.
That is indeed what I meant. Take feral as an example. That combination of abilities is easily worth a +1 LA race, even if the base race is completely and utterly generic. Just compare it to other options at that LA, and it seems obvious to me. For the idea of "races that hurt the character" we have to ask whether a given character would rather be the relevant race, or just have absolutely no abilities. It doesn't matter too much that half-orcs have -2 charisma and intelligence, because you're not going to take the race if you're emphasizing either stat. Stat bonuses matter significantly more than stat penalties do, because you plan out for these things. If you can honestly say that a race is worse than absolutely nothing in most cases where you'd want to take it (maybe all, actually. That might be necessary for this) then I'd consider it a valid choice for this rule set.

[angry_bear]

Three feats is probably too much, unless they can only be spent on the limited set of "racial ability feats". After all, humans are generally considered a good race, and one of their racial traits is a feat, and the other (+1 skill point per level) can be gotten from a feat (Nymph's Kiss, which also has a couple other benefits). Oh, and Favored Class (Any), but between single-classed characters, characters who would be their favored class anyway, and tables that just ignore that rule, that's really not relevant very often. So the total racial features of a good race should be worth about 1 1/2 feats.

eggynack, what do you mean by comparing a race to a "template on its own"? Do you mean, compared to what the template would look like on an otherwise completely generic medium humanoid with no other racial traits? And saying that something only makes sense with "races that hurt the character" isn't very strong, since the vast majority of races do hurt the character in some way (if nothing else, by penalizing an ability score). And there are some races with pretty hefty penalties, too, like non-RotD, non-UA kobolds.


Standard kobolds are perfectly fine depending on which class you're using with it. A standard caster class, or rogue, using nothing but the PH and MM (Purely because that's where the kobold stats are found) will still be capable with decent ability rolls. If you play a kobold fighter you'll probably suck, but that's going against everything the race was designed to be in the first place, so you'd have it coming.

As far as actual -1 LA races go... I dunno, anything where you roll horribly? Or a corpse I guess. A corpse would suck to play...

[Chronos]

A kobold can be OK for a rogue or spellcaster, but even for them, it's still probably going to be worse than most of the PHB races: Nobody likes a penalty to Con. Small size can be useful, but that's about all they get that's worthwhile: You'd almost always be significantly better off with a halfling or gnome. Now add to that that most of the decent +1 LA templates are only good for melee types, in which case the kobold absolutely sucks: A feral or mineral warrior kobold still won't be particularly good at anything. Now, a dark kobold, that might be worthwhile, but I'm not convinced that it'd be better, overall, than a whisper gnome.

[awa]

kobolds arnt that bad they have a bit of nat armor, darkvision and a 30 speed
a kobold caster is not that bad off

also whisper gnomes are very powerful compared to the default phb small races and probably not a fair bench mark.

[CyberThread]

I vote...



badadabadbummmmmm



KINDER!

[Scow2]

I vote...



badadabadbummmmmm



KINDER!

Only if by "Negative Level Adjustment" you mean "Always have a number of negative level."
Meaning they're all dead, because they die at level 1 and can't get any better, for those who don't get the joke.

The only monsters I see as possibly worth "Negative Level Adjustment" is monsters that are weak enough that something that normally artificially inflates levels (Such as RHD or Templates) puts them on-par with normal races.