Are Oslecamo's Improved Monster Classes good?

[Harbinger]

http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?board=34.0

I found this and thought I might try using it.

I'm a noob, so are these classes actually powerful enough to be usable?

[Shazek]

It varies by the class from somewhat weak to stupidly powerful, really. Unfortunately, you have to look at them individually to tell for sure.

[Urpriest]

It varies by the class from somewhat weak to stupidly powerful, really. Unfortunately, you have to look at them individually to tell for sure.

This, basically. There are a bunch of people that do them, so quality varies. I think they're still uniformly more balanced than playing the monsters the normal way, but you do have to make sure you're using one of the better-designed ones rather than one of the worst-designed ones. Generally you can already tell when one of them is going to be unbalanced if it uses imprecise or stilted language, rather than phrasing things like the rules do. That's generally how I judge homebrew anyway.

[Red Rubber Band]

I can't speak for the stuff made by others, but the goal in mind from Osle's perspective is higher end op.

[bobthe6th]

Yeah... I made the Titan class for that(still have to finish the purple worm...). You shouldn't optimize with those classes, they have enough power to rock out without trying too hard. Also be ready to nerf them(I know I was eyeballing my numbers), and please post/PM feedback. Most of the classes have gotten no play-testing, so... you know... you can be the guy who did.

I will say that if you use them, get ready to be addicted. If I can use a monster class, I have to fight the urge to do so. I still want to find a group to run around as a Titan with.

Also... editing the class posts is a very nice thing to do. As the writer gets nothing but praise from a group of maybe 5 for doing a good job, proofreading is really lax.

So... Yeah, their good as homebrew, and if you are willing to make hotfixes for them(straight up tell the player that they can and will be modded as the game goes on.)

[Just to Browse]

The chance of you picking up a class and being good with it is greater than doing so with a WotC monster or regular class.

So if your parties contain fighters and wizards, you're basically OK with any of them. There tends to be a lot of hidden power in them though.

[bobthe6th]

...And for the love of god, no gestalts.

[TheFallenOne]

I'm a noob, so are these classes actually powerful enough to be usable?

If you're new I'd generally recommend starting with the game proper and getting familiar with that first. Don't bring in Homebrew when you're not even yet able to assess whether it's balanced. You also seem unaware that 'is this powerful enough to be usable' is far, FAR less often an issue than 'is this too powerful'.

To the latter, the answer with monster classes is usually yes. I so far haven't seen a single one that comes even close to acceptable. Not one. Which doesn't necessarily mean there aren't any. It might well have to do something with the selection process of those who request monster classes instead.

[bobthe6th]

Its more that they are built trying to get a reasonable approximation of the monster in the monsters CR amount of levels. With solid class features, and interesting mechanics. Making this anything like pre Bo9Swords is pretty impossible. Though I would disagree with them being broken if you are already optimizing at some level.

They also tend to be optimized out of the box, rather then DIY. So if you are in a low op party, they will be like the wizard that figures out BFC is the best option. If you are running warblades though... I would not see a titan as being an issue.

[Mystic Muse]

They vary a lot, and while I haven't followed them for a long while for a variety of reasons, based on his work here, I can't say I recommend them. Many who were in the Monster class thread at first started taking issue with the way many of his classes were.

[TheFallenOne]

Its more that they are built trying to get a reasonable approximation of the monster in the monsters CR amount of levels.

Wait, is this true? You're not accidentally mistyping here? :smallconfused: Those brewers fail to understand that CR and ECL are two completely different things?
I mean, I thought badly of their sense of balance. But not THIS badly.

[Mystic Muse]

Wait, is this true? You're not accidentally mistyping here? :smallconfused: Those brewers fail to understand that CR and ECL are two completely different things?
I mean, I thought badly of their sense of balance. But not THIS badly.

The idea is, the Monster's CR = the amount of levels that monster will be. I follow this for the most part, but I don't try to fit in every single thing about the monster within those level. Heck, I don't even give my dragons proper spellcasting.

The exception for me is templates, and whether I go for CR = Levels or not depends on how I'm feeling at the time, and whether I think that's a restriction that will make me creative, or a restriction that will make the class terrible.

[bobthe6th]

Approximation is the word here. It ends up with angels coming out as battle clerics with more class features and less spells... and really weird 1-5 level classes.

The idea is that by level X, were X is equal to CR, the class plays like you would want the monster to play. It doesn't actually play like the monster on paper... but more the general gist. So a pit fiend plays like a melee fighter with some SLAs, and a Troll is a more durable fighter. The main issue is the DR/NA gets thrown around a bit.

There is a whole system of psudocasting for caster creatures. even if you are just looking for parts, some of the innovations required to make things work are interesting.

[Red Rubber Band]

Wait, is this true? You're not accidentally mistyping here? :smallconfused: Those brewers fail to understand that CR and ECL are two completely different things?
I mean, I thought badly of their sense of balance. But not THIS badly.

I think you'll find they understand it perfectly. The problem with having multiple brewers is you'll have multiple levels of op-ness. The original intent as far as op-ness for those classes goes is that they are to be high op. If they're all high op then they are balanced (against one another and the expectations/intent that they were built for).

[Harbinger]

If you're new I'd generally recommend starting with the game proper and getting familiar with that first. Don't bring in Homebrew when you're not even yet able to assess whether it's balanced. You also seem unaware that 'is this powerful enough to be usable' is far, FAR less often an issue than 'is this too powerful'.

To the latter, the answer with monster classes is usually yes. I so far haven't seen a single one that comes even close to acceptable. Not one. Which doesn't necessarily mean there aren't any. It might well have to do something with the selection process of those who request monster classes instead.

The reason I'm more concerned with "is this powerful enough to be usable" rather than "is this too powerful" is that all the ones I'm interested are fairly weak (troll, wight, ghoul). I know that too powerful is more often an issue than the inverse.

[Psionic Dog]

The reason I'm more concerned with "is this powerful enough to be usable" rather than "is this too powerful" is that all the ones I'm interested are fairly weak (troll, wight, ghoul). I know that too powerful is more often an issue than the inverse.

I did a search on that site for troll/wight/ghoul, and I'd advise caution. None are 'weak.' All three are game breaking. Not campaign breaking in power like a Wizard, but each of the three offers tools that a min-maxer could giddily exploit.

The troll has unlimited self healing at 1st level, and regeneration at 4th on top of a few other gimmicks that are either useless or encounter shattering depending on optimization. Enough said. I guess if the DM is cynical enough you can point out that it is less broken broken than an optimized Tier-2 caster, but that usually isn't the standard I'd use to judge homebrew as balanced.

The biggest problem with the ghoul and wight come down to racial abilities. All the juicy undead immunities, for the one little catch that if you die raise dead won't help you. As I said, not world breaking, but it does break a few basic game preconceptions. Past that, and the ghoul has abilities that scale with HD. Slightly weak at low levels, but it looks like it will pay overpowered dividends later on, especially if only a 2-level dip was taken.

The wight looks to be the best balanced of the three, relatively speaking. It gains potent melee combat bonus, counterbalanced by a poor BAB, and drips with evil nightmarish abilities for the proper flavor. Same problem with undead immunities as with the ghoul.


I think I'll agree with TheFallenOne. Stick to basic traditional races/classes for at least the first campaign or two.

[deuterio12]

The troll has unlimited self healing at 1st level, and regeneration at 4th on top of a few other gimmicks that are either useless or encounter shattering depending on optimization. Enough said. I guess if the DM is cynical enough you can point out that it is less broken broken than an optimized Tier-2 caster, but that usually isn't the standard I'd use to judge homebrew as balanced.

Hmm, isn't "less broken than Tier 2" basically tier 3, which is usually considered the "sweet" spot in D&D?

For example, a 1st level crusader has unlimited self healing if it picks the right devoted spirit maneuver or stance, that also happen to be pretty good in combat. A dread necromancer can pick tomb-tainted soul for unlimited self-healing as well (and the whole party if they pick that feat as well). Similarly a crusader or dread necromancer can become encounter shattering if you optimize their abilities (the dread necro somewhat more since it has actual spells, but a crusader will also curbstomp most opposition if properly built, White Raven Tactics and War Leader's Charge and whatnot).

Considering that the "traditional" alternative is playing a barbarian/fighter that goes "I full attack/charge every turn and I'm kinda screwed if the enemy has any kind of special attack/defense", then it may not be so bad an idea to go with tier 3. In particular if the OP's party already has actual tier 2 or 1 casters, which is quite probable

[Yogibear41]

While alot of the creatures gain bonuses to stats and natural armor, they more or less should be used only using natural attacks and wearing no-armor for the most part. Unless you specifically sit down and have armor made for some monstrous creature chances are you are never going to find/buy something that fits it. Also keep in mind the non-on paper attributes, sure that troll looks fun to play but, how do you ever expect to walk into a town/city? Its basically impossible.(I suppose this is setting specific, but I think it should hold true most of the time) Majority of things on that list are considered monstrous and could easily be hunted down by the right people, and pretty much all of them have their normal weaknesses.

Now granted alot of these classes are better than others, and alot of them are strictly superior to playing something like a fighter,(thats not saying much) I don't think any of them give full casting like a wizard/cleric so at the end of the day they will fall behind in that category.

Now if you take something like one of the dragons, which is basically an arcane gish singled classed, they get some DR, spell resistance, and ability bonuses, as well as delayed spell progression. Its just as easy to get near the same amount of BAB and end up with higher level spells known just using a human and selecting the right classes.

Basically like one guy said earlier, high tier 3. Maybe low tier 2 if you pick one that advances casting or has alot of spell like abilities.







I think I'll agree with TheFallenOne. Stick to basic traditional races/classes for at least the first campaign or two.


BUT they are so BORING! :smallsmile:


EDIT: so just read the Titan, and yeah it maybe a bit much lol. Most of the ones I have read were generally cr 5-7 or lower creatures and they seemed fine to me.


I actually tried to use the force golem in a game once but the DM said no, of course he also said no to a wizard, a cleric, a druid, and a sorcerer. I did finally talk him into letting me use the homebrew were-bear though, 3 months later I still haven't transformed.

[TheFallenOne]

Hmm, isn't "less broken than Tier 2" basically tier 3, which is usually considered the "sweet" spot in D&D?

Yes. Of course. Leave out the most important word. When he says 'optimized Tier 2 caster' just ignore the optimized part. And hey, less broken than Tier 2 basically means Tier 3!
Splendid was to make an argument.

[Harbinger]

I did a search on that site for troll/wight/ghoul, and I'd advise caution. None are 'weak.' All three are game breaking. Not campaign breaking in power like a Wizard, but each of the three offers tools that a min-maxer could giddily exploit.

The troll has unlimited self healing at 1st level, and regeneration at 4th on top of a few other gimmicks that are either useless or encounter shattering depending on optimization. Enough said. I guess if the DM is cynical enough you can point out that it is less broken broken than an optimized Tier-2 caster, but that usually isn't the standard I'd use to judge homebrew as balanced.

The biggest problem with the ghoul and wight come down to racial abilities. All the juicy undead immunities, for the one little catch that if you die raise dead won't help you. As I said, not world breaking, but it does break a few basic game preconceptions. Past that, and the ghoul has abilities that scale with HD. Slightly weak at low levels, but it looks like it will pay overpowered dividends later on, especially if only a 2-level dip was taken.

The wight looks to be the best balanced of the three, relatively speaking. It gains potent melee combat bonus, counterbalanced by a poor BAB, and drips with evil nightmarish abilities for the proper flavor. Same problem with undead immunities as with the ghoul.


I think I'll agree with TheFallenOne. Stick to basic traditional races/classes for at least the first campaign or two.

No one I would be playing with is a min-maxer. None of them know how to optimize. They barely know how to play the game. I'm already letting one of them play a druid and another play a swashbuckler as well. Would these classes still be OP if used by my inexperienced players, or would that be worse?

[Yogibear41]

I'm pretty sure a straight classed swashbuckler is never op, also from an inexperienced stand point alot of the monster classes are easier to play because they basically get flat out bonuses and don't have to really think about what they do as much as just do it. Although it still depends alot on which monster class they choose, something like the troll is pretty strait forward attack things til they die, hope my healing outpaces their damage enough before I die.


Although I suppose it could be said that giving them slightly easier classes to play to begin with could help them learn, that probably defeats the point in the long run.

[Harbinger]

I'm pretty sure a straight classed swashbuckler is never op.

I know. What I was saying is that I'm already letting one player play a Tier 1 and another play a Tier 5, not that the swashbuckler was overpowered.

[Yogibear41]

Got ya, well I doubt you would be able to notice any difference until at least level 5-6, aside from the fact that the druid is basically two people at those level thanks to his trusty ole' riding dog. To an extent I think some people over value the tier system at times but that is an entire can of worms in and of itself.

[Harbinger]

Got ya, well I doubt you would be able to notice any difference until at least level 5-6, aside from the fact that the druid is basically two people at those level thanks to his trusty ole' riding dog. To an extent I think some people over value the tier system at times but that is an entire can of worms in and of itself.

Alright. I don't think the wight/ghoul/troll would be any more of a problem than the druid, right?

[Yogibear41]

For the first few levels the troll will probably be more powerful than the rest of the party, just because of fast healing/regen and multiple natural attacks. The ghouls seems fine, not really OP at all imo when you realized that the majority of the world has great fortitude saves. The Wights negative levels could be really good, but it still has to hit and missed attacks will still use up uses per day. Even so its not like someone couldn't cast cast enervation a few times to achieve the same results. In the long run the druid should still end up the strongest, with level of strength difference depending on what the monsters decided to class into after their monster classes.


Looking at it from a different point of view though why would a druid be traveling with two undead and a troll? I can see maybe the troll, but undead should be abhorrent to the majority of druids imo. Although perhaps I am being swayed by how things are in the games I have played in.

[Red Rubber Band]

Looking at it from a different point of view though why would a druid be traveling with two undead and a troll? I can see maybe the troll, but undead should be abhorrent to the majority of druids imo. Although perhaps I am being swayed by how things are in the games I have played in.

The cycle of life and undeath? :smallwink:

[Vertharrad]

The cycle of life and death. :smallwink:

Corrected that for you.

[Red Rubber Band]

Incorrected that for you.

Ftfy.

He's talking about undead, so definitely the cycle of undeath.

[TuggyNE]

The cycle of life and undeath? :smallwink:

Druids are almost always about life and death, because that's how nature generally does things, and see undead as a perversion of that cycle. As such, most druids are nearly as opposed to undead as Pelorites.

Soundbites like "the cycle of life and undeath" are cute, but unless you come up with some reason that actually is consistent with their ethos, it doesn't work.

[Red Rubber Band]

Druids are almost always about life and death

Done. There is my reasoning. And also he is knowingly considering an undead character in a party that already has a druid.

With a lack of any other evidence to the contrary, I'm happy to just leave it there. Especially as my original comment was tongue in cheek. :smallsigh:

[Harbinger]

In this case, I don't think the druid or the druid's player would mind there being undead in the party.

EDIT: http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=1826.0

Is the Imp balanced?