PDA

View Full Version : HD and LA



Alleine
2007-07-14, 08:38 PM
While perusing monsters to see if any would be interesting to play as, I noticed some unbalanced looking level adjustments. However, when speaking with my DM about this, he reminded me that you must add a creatures HD to its LA when finding out when they'll be able to take class levels. For many, this means a long, long time. In some circumstances this means gaining class levels is a hopless endeavor.

So, I propose a simple solution: I won't take the extra HD. I don't need them, and don't want them, and certainly I can work out a boost to LA to balance things, but as it stands, there is little to no point in playing most of the monsters that are provided with a section for character stats.

I ask for input, is this reasonable? My DM can be fairly lenient and reasonable. And who would know better about balance than the members of a board who have argued balance for goodness knows how long, and are experienced players to boot. Obviously I'll have to go over the exact exchanges with my DM, but does this make sense, or am I mad?

BCOVertigo
2007-07-14, 09:15 PM
While perusing monsters to see if any would be interesting to play as, I noticed some unbalanced looking level adjustments. However, when speaking with my DM about this, he reminded me that you must add a creatures HD to its LA when finding out when they'll be able to take class levels. For many, this means a long, long time. In some circumstances this means gaining class levels is a hopless endeavor.

So, I propose a simple solution: I won't take the extra HD. I don't need them, and don't want them, and certainly I can work out a boost to LA to balance things, but as it stands, there is little to no point in playing most of the monsters that are provided with a section for character stats.

I ask for input, is this reasonable? My DM can be fairly lenient and reasonable. And who would know better about balance than the members of a board who have argued balance for goodness knows how long, and are experienced players to boot. Obviously I'll have to go over the exact exchanges with my DM, but does this make sense, or am I mad?

I agree the HD are ugly and unwanted but think of it this way, having an ECL 10 character with half the hp of a normal one might be playable, while having an ECL 8 character with 1/6 would not be.

Converting the entire creatures adjustment into LA makes it impossible to play in lower level campaigns, while monstrous progressions like in savage species make it at least somewhat viable. (I know that book is horrible and abusive in some places but we'll pretend the OP is talking about something sane.)

In a high enough campaign you can get away with more LA, but at the same time you are also giving up more, especially as a caster for obvious reasons. As well, many(most) classes wait until later in their progression to give out a 'capstone' ability for balance purposes, so even more mundane classes and PrC's are usually hurt by the loss.

If you are going to transfer your characters HD into LA, be sure to look at every aspect of the character and how it will be affected.

CASTLEMIKE
2007-07-14, 09:30 PM
Using the LA buy down option helps a little with ECL particularly with lots of hit dice for PCs as a general rule. Part of the reason they normally have those high LAs is their abilities are so useful in game.

Gestalt also works well with half monster/PC class characters as an option since it has a corresponding cost in game to pursue.

I noticed you didn't post the monsters you were considering could you be a little more specific regarding the unbalanced monsters?

Few players want to play a lone dragon using ECL rules in a standard race party. Janni (6HD +5 LA and the Half Janni +4 LA are to expensive IMO for what they provide in a non planar campaign compared to other plane shifting races and templates like the Githyanki and Githzerai or a Shadow Walker or Shadow Creature.

In the end it depends on what monster types you are considering. Accross the board or cherry picking is to abuseable IMO as players rarely choose the worst monsters to play.

Things like swapping out 10 levels of Battle Sorcerer or Fighter levels for an Efreeti which is a lot better than 10 HD either losing +3 BAB and getting full spellcasting or picking up lots of feats.

In a leveling up campaign taking Non PRC wizard levels instead of HD with an Efreeti so you are a wizard 10 at level 19 sure you picked up some spellcasting but you lost D8 HD, Best BAB and 8 SPS a level for D4 HD, Poor BAB and 2 SPs a level although a Beguilder could proably shine. In the end you get 3 no experience cost wishes despite the minor restriction few players would ever have a problem getting around finding a non genie to make the wishes.

Leveling up from first as per Savage Species would provide some good guidelines for using PC subsitution levels and not allowing PRC levels until the monster HD were filled with either monster HD or regular non PRC levels.

Determine what you want to do and many times you can do it almost as well or better than being a monster.

Alleine
2007-07-14, 10:22 PM
To begin with, I would not change HD into LA, there is no good reason for such. I would, at least, remove many HD, but not so many as to render a creature useless for lack of health.

The monster in particular that caught my eye was the stone giant, with such a beautiful strength. But of course, with 14 HD and 4 LA, thats ECL 18. Now, I must say that the stone giant is impressive, but and ECL of 18 is hardly balanced to my mind. Even with LA reduction, which wouldn't happen until 15th level, I don't know if a character could recover sufficiently from such a drop in XP by the time everyone else hit level 20. I can only imagine just a few levels in a class, not enough to make much of a difference. And there is doubt as to whether such an advancement-less life would let even a careful player live to pay off LA.

I haven't read Savage Species, I'm getting my info from the SRD.

What I would do, is take several levels of giant, enough to give me some health, and gladly have only about 10 levels in a class. With LA payoff, I would be content with those 10 levels. Meaning roughly 10 HD, probably less though. I prefer to have a character that can develop overtime, not stay exactly the same till the end.

Through this, I would only use the monsters that WotC saw fit to give LA, so no dragons, efreeti, dinosaurs, and the like. Some things are simply too ludicrous and unbalanced.

CASTLEMIKE
2007-07-14, 11:09 PM
In Savage Species a Stone Giant starts off with 1D8, earth subtype feat and +3 nat armor with a +4 to St, movement of 40darkvision, +8 to hide in rocky terrain.

The Kicker is Favored Class is Stone Giant with BAB as a Bard by HD. The best multiclassing choices are barbarian, fighter and ranger.

You pick up a HD at second and third level and +2 con and a feat and +2 St at level 3.

At level 4 you pick up 60' Rock throwing 1D8 and +5 natural AC but no hit dice. +2 St and another HD at 5, Rock catching at 6 wit another HD for 5D8 total.

At level 7 you get another +2 St and +7 to Nat armor.

Over 18 levels you pick up a total of +16 to ST and +8 to Con at different levels +21 to Nat armor and other bennies.

You might use a variant and interspace fighter, barbarian or other levels in between your Favored Class Stone Giant levels and Hit Die.

A Half Giant is a +1 LA race with +2 to Con and St with a -2 to Dex whic gets the benefits of Powerful Build basically treating as if one size category higher.

Combine with something like werebear several sources but I'm referencing Races of Faerun which is a +6 HD template with some nice bennies like +16 St, +8 Con, +2 Dex, DR10/Silver and Movement 40 in Bear or Hybrid form with LA +1 for Infected and +2 LA for True Lycanthrope. Werebear feats Endurance, Run, Track (and Iron Will, Scent and Low Light Vision) in all 3 forms.

No need to be a LG half giant werebear if raised among the stone giants as the tough little runt in the family. The +1 or +2 LA can be bought down easliy 6 HD vice 14 HD and +4 LA whic basically translates to 11 or 12 character levels with LA buydown (Psychic Warrior is a favored class for half giants but if you aren't into psionics barbarian, fighter and ranger would be good favored classes)

Lemur
2007-07-14, 11:15 PM
Unfortunately, you can't really do that. It's not allowed (or even if you're going into houserule territory, still not advised) to take "some" of a monstrous race's class when making a character with that creature.

If you're using monsters as classes, you're not allowed to take any other class until you're finished with the full progression of the monster class.

AtomicKitKat
2007-07-14, 11:17 PM
In general, it's probably better to drop LA and keep the HD. Unless the character has some ridiculously OP "win buttons"(All the "Word" spells come to mind. Blasphemy, Dictum, Holy Word, Word of Chaos, which aren't even that good when you consider that the +4 LA plus most opponents having more HD than their CR renders the maximum effect unlikely to happen when it matters), LA=Dead Levels. At least with HD, you get some HP, a little BAB, and some Feats and Skills(which could let you get into Prestige Classes without ever taking a Class level).


Unfortunately, you can't really do that. It's not allowed (or even if you're going into houserule territory, still not advised) to take "some" of a monstrous race's class when making a character with that creature.

If you're using monsters as classes, you're not allowed to take any other class until you're finished with the full progression of the monster class.

Sort of true. Ghouls can break off progression if they don't want to become Ghasts. One could argue for "interrupting" progression with a need to "age" into the next category, as with Dragons, whose lives span a millenium or more. It does require some tweaking though, in order to maintain balance of stats and stuff(and the DM has to agree on a fixed point at which you can interrupt).

CASTLEMIKE
2007-07-14, 11:23 PM
Unfortunately, you can't really do that. It's not allowed (or even if you're going into houserule territory, still not advised) to take "some" of a monstrous race's class when making a character with that creature.

If you're using monsters as classes, you're not allowed to take any other class until you're finished with the full progression of the monster class.

That line is no longer so clearly drawn by Wizards anymore since they keep stepping over it. It is why I suggested it as a Variant alternative since Dragons can take levels of sorcerer without having properly leveled up and observing the Favored Class and multiclassing experience rules. This delays receipt of many of the Favored Class benefits progression. The same goes for Dragonblooded and many +1 and +2 LA Planar races Gith, Giz, Tieflings.

Alleine
2007-07-14, 11:41 PM
What I'm currently thinking of doing is only having one HD and maybe bumping up the LA to 6, which I won't pay off because I don't think its worth it, but maybe I will. Or I could bump the LA up to something that isn't listed for payoff, I don't know since it sounds like I can't stop in the middle of my racial hit dice. If I only take one HD, which I'm allowed to do, I won't recieve any of the feats, skills, or anything else, but will be required to take a class level. Then I wait for several levels, being constantly buffed for my protection by the spellcasters, and chucking stones at enemies from the rear of the group. I'd also stay very, very close to the cleric.

AtomicKitKat
2007-07-15, 01:01 AM
Generally, you can try to divide the number of HD by about 3, to get the approximate age categories.

1/3 would be young(about the equivalent of a 5-9 year old), 2/3 for a juvenile(equivalent till about 14 or so) and 3/3 for a "mature adult". Apply these age bands to a "default" member of the race in question, based on the human ages.

Basically take say, 7/70(Average of "Young", divide by Venerable age) for the young one, so if the race hits Venerable at 70, a "young" member of the race has 1/3 of the HD at about 10 years of age. A "Juvenile/teenager" would be around 1/5 of the "Venerable Age" range, so 4 HD out of 6(example), with most of the stats and abilities worked out(spell-likes are trickier, ability bonuses and size easier).

Elana
2007-07-15, 01:40 AM
if your DM is reasonable, you might convince him that you should earn XP according to your CR and not ECL.

(For normal characters level and CR are the same, so they probably have only picked level to avoid confusion)

With that rule tweak you still need lots of XP to gain levels, but at least you will get them faster than your non monstrous comrades.

Ali
2007-07-15, 07:00 AM
Unfortunately, you can't really do that. It's not allowed (or even if you're going into houserule territory, still not advised) to take "some" of a monstrous race's class when making a character with that creature.

If you're using monsters as classes, you're not allowed to take any other class until you're finished with the full progression of the monster class.

I agree with this, really. Taking the monster class is the price for playing one.

CASTLEMIKE
2007-07-15, 09:19 AM
Stone Giant is the Favored Class. Treat it like the Paladin class then mechanically. If he spends a feat he can multiclass before finishing as long as he only gets prorated Stone Giant class benefits as per Savage Species.

Alleine
2007-07-15, 11:08 AM
I like kitkat's idea a little more than the rest, because it seems to be more in tune with what I'm looking for, and it sounds reasonable. Elana's suggestion will probably prove helpful as well. Thanks guys!

I've never liked the monster class progressions I've seen, which I'll go into later, right now I have to go.

Alleine
2007-07-15, 04:31 PM
Ok, so the monster classes are good and all for when its just a monster, but when it becomes a PC, there need to be changes. I don't want 14 levels of monster wherein I gain my extra attribute points and special attacks because generally, the special attacks and such don't hold a candle to class features. If a monster gains monster levels, they should at least allow them to take full monster levels, with extra things for those who manage to become a powerful example of their race, but I see nothing for that.

Now, I'll compare the stone giant to the NPC classes. For each class, the giant loses for number of attacks, against only two of those classes the giant has a higher BAB. A commoner of the same ECL has more attacks! That doesn't make any sense to me. Obviously though the giant would win in a fight, but I just don't think the racial levels are quite as good as class levels. The main reason someone in my group chooses a race is because of the ability scores that get bonuses, however, I don't quite think the attribute bonuses are as good as they seem, it isn't worth it to lose class levels in exchange for more str, because most class features help in ways that extra strength cannot! But I digress...

As a correction to my earlier post, I really didn't understand what kitkat was saying. Less HD = younger, therefore less power, now I understand, and I can see why it is that way, it makes sense, but I still don't like it. All I want is a decently balanced way of playing a powerful, and interesting race. Plenty of RP options here as well as ingame goodies that aren't game breaking. They may rock the stability at first, but it should stablize later on. Instead what I see is an advantage early on turning handicap later.

I don't believe that taking a monster class should be the price for playing a monster, or at least it should be a reasonable price, not a punishment.
/end rant

AtomicKitKat
2007-07-16, 08:06 AM
As a correction to my earlier post, I really didn't understand what kitkat was saying. Less HD = younger, therefore less power, now I understand, and I can see why it is that way, it makes sense, but I still don't like it. All I want is a decently balanced way of playing a powerful, and interesting race. Plenty of RP options here as well as ingame goodies that aren't game breaking. They may rock the stability at first, but it should stablize later on. Instead what I see is an advantage early on turning handicap later.

Actually, depending on what you pick, my way is possibly open to more abuse. Most campaigns(by necessity) occur within no more than about a decade(any more than that, the Humans in the party start bitching about getting more useless, unless they're casters, naturally), meaning that if you pick a race that has say, a 2-300 year lifespan, chances are that you will not even leave your initial age category without DM intervention.

The other reason to play a younger member of the race, is so that you get to start at the smaller size, which is slightly more advantageous(how many dungeons have Huge doors?). Should you feel the need to, you can try to age a bit(using AD&D rule of Haste=Age 1 year each cast), and then use your increased size to up the combat potential of the party.