PDA

View Full Version : Gestalt+Racial HD



AtomicKitKat
2007-02-01, 11:23 AM
Would it pimp/gimp races with racial HD if I didn't allow them to Gestalt(did a quick read through on d20srd.org, so I have a rough idea of the concept), but removed/reduced level adjustment?

For example: A Lillend is technically a Ranger/Bard, a Rakshasa is a Ranger/Sorceror, etc. I get the feeling it might make low HD+high LA races like Pixies somewhat stronger(since they tend to have abilities that jack their LAs very high), while gimping some mid-HD+Low LA+poor abilities like Ogres.

In case anyone's curious, I'm pondering DMing a PBP campaign on the boards, and I'd like to hammer out the rules a little bit first.

Twisted.Fate
2007-02-01, 11:31 AM
A Rakshasa is a ranger? Hold on, what? They're sorcs with some other neat stuff. Ranger - that is, wilderness expert with either a bow or two swords and a loyal animal - doesn't hardly factor into it, unless I'm reading the monster wrong. And, actually...Lillends too? They're definitely not rangers.

Aside from that...just to get your right...you want to reduce LA on monsters in a gestalt game, but prevent them from gestalting the rest of their levels? Or prevent them from gestalting their racial HD? Or what?

AtomicKitKat
2007-02-01, 12:18 PM
Just prevent them from Gestalting their racial HD, but reduce LA to compensate.

The "Ranger" analogy was that they have D8 HD, with decent skill points. Monk might have been a better analogy, except for Monks getting all the various speed and whatnot for levelling.

Yakk
2007-02-01, 01:08 PM
Let them gesault their LA with their racial HD.

Ie, a monster that is 6 HD with 2 LA has 2 HD//LA gesaulted, then 4 HD//single-PC-class gesaulted.

A creature with 3 HD and 8 LA would have 3 HD//LA gesaulted and 5 single-PC-class//LA gesaulted.

AtomicKitKat
2007-02-01, 01:11 PM
Hmm. The only question is should it be first Racial HD gestalted, or last HD gestalted, or distributed evenly, like G1, R2, G3, R4, G5, class? This would also sort of skew out of whack if you have something like Pixie with 2 HD and +6LA. On the other hand, I might cap LA to something like no more than +1 LA per HD. This could do with some more thinking, but it has potential.

Keep the ideas coming please. :)

Caelestion
2007-02-01, 01:12 PM
The whole point of LA is reduce their hit dice. Gestalting LA with HD removes their weakness. Since it's gestalt however, apply the LA to both sides at once, but halve it first - for instance, a lich or half-fiend would be +2 to both sides and an illithid would be +4 to both sides (+7 halved and rounded up).

In return, allow them to gestalt their racial HD normally. A rakshasa Courtier 7 (AEG's Rokugan) or an illithid Wizard 8 or a minotaur Barbarian 6 are all priceless, with a total ECL of 11 (7 HD + 1/2 of 7 LA), 12 (8 HD + 1/2 7 LA) and 7 (6 HD + 1/2 of 2 LA).

In this system, the Aasimar and other +1 LA races are still shafted unfortunately and you be might be better dropping +1 LA in gestalt.

AtomicKitKat
2007-02-01, 02:09 PM
Nod. I was already thinking of reducing the LA for all races, so dividing it by 2 makes sense. Hmm. Rakshasa gestalt with Rogue/whatever for hot Arcane Trickstery? So let's try that out first.

We'd have like:

Rakshasa/Rogue 7, +4 LA, ECL 11? With Sneak Attack 4d6, Evasion, Uncanny Dodge, Trapfinding, Trap Sense 2, 3rd level Sorceror spells,

Followed by Arcane Trickster 2/X 2(Fighter maybe? Would tacking Sorceror as the base side work to advance it by 2 levels for every 1 level of AT/Sorc?), for another +2d6 Sneak Attack, 2 more levels of Sorceror casting(4 if it stacks), etc.?

Yakk
2007-02-01, 02:19 PM
Think of Racial LA as a "0 HP per level, 0 BaB per level, 0 save per level, 0 skill points per level" class.

Then a Pixie has:
2 levels of Pixie HD.
6 levels of Pixie LA.

A L 8 character would thus be:
2 Pixie HD//2 Pixie LA
4 Pixie LA//4 PC levels
2 PC levels//2 PC levels

If your race was Ogre (4 HD and 2 LA), you would thus be:
2 Ogre HD//2 Ogre LA
2 Ogre HD//2 PC levels
4 PC levels//4 PC levels

This reduces your character's abilities somewhat.

AtomicKitKat
2007-02-01, 02:36 PM
Hmm. The whole campaign is likely to be a very monstrous one, so I'll have to weigh the two different approaches.

Caelestion
2007-02-01, 03:02 PM
Well, Rakshasas get a free Eschew Materials (like Dragons), because their sorcerer spells are innate, not class-based. A Rakshasa/Sor 3 & Rog 10 would be ECL 14. You're messing things up by taking Arcane Trickster in gestalt - it's explicitly a combo-class and therefore heavily recommended against using it.

However, Rakshasa/Sor 13 & Rog 10/Ftr 10 (ECL 24 & at the boundary of epic saves etc.) would work and might even mix in the feel of Eldritch Knight as well as Arcane Trickster.

AtomicKitKat
2007-02-01, 03:13 PM
Nod. I was just trying to come up with something. Perhaps Archmage/Rogue then? I'm still wondering what happens if I take a spellcasting increasing class mixed with whatever base-casting class I already have.

Zincorium
2007-02-01, 03:43 PM
I'm with Yakk. Monster HD are equivalent to a really poor class. They should never be considered as both sides of gestalt. LA are different depending on how you see them. Personally, other than a few odd exceptions (most of which are in savage species), LA is never even as good as class features, never mind the crushing loss of hit dice and caster level. Unless you have a severe grudge against monsters with LA or nobody is planning on using them anyway, I strongly suggest putting them as one 'side' of the gestalt progression.

With all the tricks that you can use, mostly involving getting into prestige classes early by virtue of simultaneously increasing BAB, spellcasting, and/or skill points (none of which LA type abilities will exacerbate), it's not going to overpower an otherwise manageable campaign.

Fax Celestis
2007-02-01, 03:48 PM
Hmm. The whole campaign is likely to be a very monstrous one, so I'll have to weigh the two different approaches.

If that's the case, then you may want to waive a predetermined amount of LA.

Caelestion
2007-02-01, 03:50 PM
I'm sure that a Rakshasa Sor 7/Archmage X will still cast spells just fine. After all, it's a 14th-level Sorcerer effective.

PinkysBrain
2007-02-01, 03:52 PM
Would it pimp/gimp races with racial HD if I didn't allow them to Gestalt(did a quick read through on d20srd.org, so I have a rough idea of the concept), but removed/reduced level adjustment?
No, it would just gimp the player ...

The only way I'd play a creature with ECL>1 with those rules is if they had their own casting with near ECL levels ... which with the LA reduction would put them at casting over ECL levels, which would be rather powerful. With any other type of ECL>1 creature you'd end up gimped worse than in non gestalt.

Why not go the easy way? Put both the LA and the racial HD on a single side of the gestalt? Sure it's ridiculously overpowered, but it's gestalt ... it's ridiculously overpowered to begin with. If you want your players to play a monstrous race reward them for doing so, don't punish them.

Or alternatively allow players to take something like wizard//wizard at a level and gain the class abilities of 2 wizard levels except for HD/BAB/saves. If you allow them to do that for the same number of levels they "lost" due to having LA and/or racial HD on both sides they can still get full casting (or binding, or maneuvers, etc). The inability to have that is the biggest reason not to play a monstrous race with standard rules (gestalt or non gestalt).

AtomicKitKat
2007-02-01, 09:49 PM
I already considered dropping at least half the LA for most races, and even lowering LA for some races to below their racial HD. I might wind up removing most no-save Instant-win spells. Especially the alignment Word spells and Forcecage/wall. Maybe make it require a Reflex save or touch attack roll.

Fizban
2007-02-02, 12:35 AM
First: since when has the point of LA been to remove hit dice? IMO and what seems to be the point of LA is to compensate for powerful racial abilities by removing levels of class abilities. Since racial hit die have no class abilities, it seems even more appropriate to put them parallel with the LA for a gestalt game.

Second: since when do dragons and raksashas not require material components? They cast like sorcerers, they need the same components. It's even mentioned in several places that dragons often embed the focuses they need in their hide so as not to lose them. The "innate magic" descriptor doesn't fly, sorcerers use "innate magic", and they use componetns, there's no reason creatures with sorcerer casting should not. (unless I missed something in the creature descriptions, but it sounds like you're assuming a general rule which I'm quite sure does not exist).

Mewtarthio
2007-02-02, 12:49 AM
First: since when has the point of LA been to remove hit dice? IMO and what seems to be the point of LA is to compensate for powerful racial abilities by removing levels of class abilities. Since racial hit die have no class abilities, it seems even more appropriate to put them parallel with the LA for a gestalt game.

But LA also lowers saving throws, attack bonus, Hit Points, and HD for effects like Blasphemy.

Fizban
2007-02-02, 03:32 AM
Yes, but was it their intent to lower saves, AB, and hp, or was it their intent to remove class levels for features. I would say it's to delay class features. Saves, AB, and hp can all be increased by other factors, but class levels are the only way to get class features, and LA costs class levels.

Also, creatures with racial hit die get less LA than those without according to Savage Species, and a look at the various LA+racial HD races doesn't seem to prove that wrong. This is because while they still have HD, they don't have the class features that come from class levels.

PinkysBrain
2007-02-02, 09:59 AM
Their intent is fine and well, but the result is that creatures with high ECL are very weak ... especially in gestalt.

If as a DM you want to get players to play monstrous races it only makes sense to houserule, since the standard rules are just very poor.