The LA-assignment thread: Making monster PCs VI-able [Archive] - Page 6

liquidformat

2019-06-13, 10:32 AM

CL/ML 3 or HD for expansion and invisibility... that's not bad. It's too strong for LA +0, but I don't think I'd play one at +1... that's just personal preference, though.

I don't think that's right. "When a creature uses a psi-like ability, the power is manifested as if the creature had spent a number of power points equal to its manifester level" is pretty definitive. Whether it's mentioned in the stat block is just bookkeeping--I wouldn't like the "reading psionic creature entries" text to override the general rule on PLAs.

I am sorry but quoting the half of the sentence that proves your point and leaving out the half that rejects your point is pretty unethical and doesn't make for a particularly good argument especially when I linked to said statement.

It reads "When a creature uses a psi-like ability, the power is manifested as if the creature had spent a number of power points equal to its manifester level, which may augment the power to improve its damage or save DC."

It explicitly calls out what said power point may be used for that seems pretty clear cut. In fact the second link I shared goes over the fact that augmented powers have an asterisk and include information on how they are augmented inside the creature entry.

These are the general rules as stated, so unless the creature entry says otherwise (which the Psionic Duergar doesn't) we have to assume there is no augmentation allowed to the expansion power.

For invisibility, the EPH (and SRD) has got you covered: "In some cases, a creature’s psi-like abilities may include an effect that does not duplicate any power in this book. For such abilities, treat the creature’s manifester level as the caster level for the spell" (paraphrased). Duergar are mentioned as example.

Ah, found the reference to this, they are treated as psi-likes so no issue with invisibility then.

ExLibrisMortis

2019-06-13, 11:13 AM

I am sorry but quoting the half of the sentence that proves your point and leaving out the half that rejects your point is pretty unethical and doesn't make for a particularly good argument especially when I linked to said statement.
The second half of the sentence doesn't change the first. You're reading it wrong :smallsigh:.

which may augment the power to improve its damage or save DC
It's not a restriction. Augmentation may do that, or it may do other things. That's all.

liquidformat

2019-06-13, 01:18 PM

The second half of the sentence doesn't change the first. You're reading it wrong :smallsigh:.

It's not a restriction. Augmentation may do that, or it may do other things. That's all.

Sorry but that isn't the way things work you can't just add any or statement you want in there. By that logic I could walk into a car dealership and after they say 'you may have a free shirt' I am can take a free car because they 'may' isn't a restriction. Similarly saying can isn't a restricting verb in and of itself so you could use the same argument.

The fact is we have two places to look for celerity on how psi-like abilities work which reside in the same section of general rules for psionic monsters. The first one tells us you get power points equal to ML, and as a general rule they may be used for damage or save DC. The second place where psi-likes are mentioned states that other augmentations that are allowed to be used with be signified by an asterisk and a description inside the entry. Nowhere in the rules does it state that you can use any other augmentations, in this case they specified what can/may be used and used restriction by omission since they didn't see a need for an exhaustive list.

If you as a dm want to fiat that the pp may be used on any augmentation that is good on you but it isn't RAW.

lord_khaine

2019-06-13, 01:21 PM

It's not a restriction. Augmentation may do that, or it may do other things. That's all.

I am with Ex on this one. It seems pretty clear thats how it works.
Partly because if not, then this "When a creature uses a psi-like ability, the power is manifested as if the creature had spent a number of power points equal to its manifester level"
Would suddenly not be relevant. A power being manifested for additional power point doesnt do anything special if the power points isnt used.

liquidformat

2019-06-13, 01:25 PM

I am with Ex on this one. It seems pretty clear thats how it works.

What exactly is clear about that interpretation that literally requires ignoring parts of sentences and entire sections such as 'Creatures With Psi-Like Abilities'?

GreatWyrmGold

2019-06-13, 01:44 PM

The second half of the sentence doesn't change the first. You're reading it wrong :smallsigh:.

It's not a restriction. Augmentation may do that, or it may do other things. That's all.
By extending that logic, you can augment expansion to summon a hot pink invisible unicorn. The rules don't explicitly say you can't! They just tell you something you can augment the power for, they don't explicitly say you can't augment it any other way!

If the writers meant what you think they do, they'd have written either "When a creature uses a psi-like ability, the power is manifested as if the creature had spent a number of power points equal to its manifester level, which may augment the power" or "When a creature uses a psi-like ability, the power is manifested as if the creature had spent a number of power points equal to its manifester level, which may augment the power (such as to improve its damage or save DC)." You're arguing that the writer, for some reason known only to you, chose the one way to phrase that sentence that clearly went against their intent.

ExLibrisMortis

2019-06-13, 02:22 PM

By that logic I could walk into a car dealership and after they say 'you may have a free shirt' I am can take a free car because they 'may' isn't a restriction.

By extending that logic, you can augment expansion to summon a hot pink invisible unicorn.
...

Not every "it's not a restriction" argument is immediately an argument that anything goes. Your examples make you look ridiculous.

D&D operates on an exception-based rule system. If the general rule says something is allowable, then it is (note that the most general rule is "you can do anything"); if a more specific rule disallows it, it isn't, unless an even more specific rule allows it again, and so on.

A power can be augmented using the augmentation rules in its description. This is the general rule, and it is what PLAs inherit the ability to be augmented from, just like SLAs inherit the ability to scale with caster level.

A more specific rule then says that a PLA is manifested as if the maximum number of power points (i.e. equal to ML) had been spent on it. Unlike powers, PLAs must have ML = pp cost, which usually doesn't matter, but could theoretically become relevant if you want a small amount of damage (low pp investment) with a high ML check versus SR/PR.

The comment that augmentation may change the power's damage or save DC merely clarifies and reminds the reader that numbers need to be updated. It can't be an exception, as Lord Khaine notes, because it's not actually forbidding anything (it's allowing damage/DC to change), and it's not allowing anything that was previously forbidden (damage/DC were already able to change).

In short: It is not a restriction to the rule that PLAs can be augmented, nor enabling specific augmentations that were unavailable to PLAs.

liquidformat

2019-06-13, 02:23 PM

By extending that logic, you can augment expansion to summon a hot pink invisible unicorn. The rules don't explicitly say you can't! They just tell you something you can augment the power for, they don't explicitly say you can't augment it any other way!

If the writers meant what you think they do, they'd have written either "When a creature uses a psi-like ability, the power is manifested as if the creature had spent a number of power points equal to its manifester level, which may augment the power" or "When a creature uses a psi-like ability, the power is manifested as if the creature had spent a number of power points equal to its manifester level, which may augment the power (such as to improve its damage or save DC)." You're arguing that the writer, for some reason known only to you, chose the one way to phrase that sentence that clearly went against their intent.

Even just leaving the statement ambiguous like ExLibrisMortis first claimed would support the argument better than how things have been written.

...

Not every "it's not a restriction" argument is immediately an argument that anything goes. Your examples make you look ridiculous.

D&D operates on an exception-based rule system. If the general rule says something is allowable, then it is (note that the most general rule is "you can do anything"); if a more specific rule disallows it, it isn't, unless an even more specific rule allows it again, and so on.

A power can be augmented using the augmentation rules in its description. This is the general rule, and it is what PLAs inherit the ability to be augmented from, just like SLAs inherit the ability to scale with caster level.

A more specific rule then says that a PLA is manifested as if the maximum number of power points (i.e. equal to ML) had been spent on it. Unlike powers, PLAs must have ML = pp cost, which usually doesn't matter, but could theoretically become relevant if you want a small amount of damage (low pp investment) with a high ML check versus SR/PR.

The comment that augmentation may change the power's damage or save DC merely clarifies and reminds the reader that numbers need to be updated. It can't be an exception, as Lord Khaine notes, because it's not actually forbidding anything (it's allowing damage/DC to change), and it's not allowing anything that was previously forbidden (damage/DC were already able to change).

In short: It is not a restriction to the rule that PLAs can be augmented, nor enabling specific augmentations that were unavailable to PLAs.

Our examples are as ridiculous as your claims, you have neither RAW nor RAI backing. If what you claim was true then they would use 'for example' not may, in the English language and the rules in general may isn't a synonym of 'for example' as much as you would like to think so.

Furthermore, there was the second half of my argument which you have chosen to ignore, presumably because it lays bare just how wrong you are and the fact that you have no legs to stand on for your claim. under Creatures With Psi-Like Abilities (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/monsters/overview.htm#creaturesWithPsiLikeAbilities) it says the following:
Powers that have increased effects due to augmentation include information about the effect. An asterisk indicates that the power has already been augmented by the creature’s innate ability.

Powers that can’t be augmented, or that are manifested at their normal minimum level, do not contain any special notations. Resolve the effect of manifesting the power without augmentation at the creature’s given manifester level.

If your claims were true there would be no need for psi-likes to come prebuffed with specific augments, nor would there be language explaining this and stating powers without an asterisk can't be buffed.

So from the RAW/RAI this is what we know:
1) all psi-likes have PP equal to ML
1.1) for all psi-likes these PP can be used for augmenting damage and save DCs
2)psi-likes with other augmentations are denoted with '*' and a description of said changes
3)psi-likes without an '*' can't augmented outside of what is stated in 1.1.

Falontani

2019-06-13, 04:11 PM

Some psionic powers, like Psionic Dominate, have several ways they may be augmented, and you have to choose which way to augment it, rather than just augment it in every way. Thus Psionic Aboleth already has it augmented to target any one type of creature, and to last 24 hours. However the Psionic Aboleth may not take control of several creatures with a single manifestation of the power. This is because the designers locked in which augmentations the psionic aboleth may use with their Psionic Dominate. Had they not added the asterisk to the Psionic Aboleth's Psionic Dominate pla, then it would have been able to dominate several creatures at once with a single manifestation. This is the reasoning behind the asterisk. Not to make one creature's augmentation special (although they prove that it may do that as well) but to limit specific creature's.

Dimers

2019-06-13, 04:13 PM

I know that there are very few actually correct WotC statblocks, but ... it'd be really weird to limit PLAs to augmenting only DC and damage when so many augmented powers in statblocks don't change DC or damage. On the psi-aboleth alone, there's false sensory input, mindlink and thought shield. Can we chalk this up to "WotC writers don't create their work as carefully as thousands of readers later analyze it"?

I vote LA +1 for the psi-duergar. It's not a +1 I'd want to play, but immunity to poison is a strong argument that they're better than +0.

EDIT: Crap, I never realized -- that's a dwarf that can't get drunk! That's just wrong!

ViperMagnum357

2019-06-13, 04:24 PM

LA +1 on the Psi-Duergar. Not something I am interested in, but a little too much for a level playing field against standard races.

PoeticallyPsyco

2019-06-13, 04:47 PM

Seems like the problem is that "may" has two relevant definitions here. It could be interpreted as 'permissible actions include the following' or as 'only the following is what is permissible'.

ExLibrisMortis

2019-06-13, 05:29 PM

Seems like the problem is that "may" has two relevant definitions here. It could be interpreted as 'permissible actions include the following' or as 'only the following is what is permissible'.
You may (sorry) have a point there; "may" can express "it is allowed" or "it is possible", and though either can be read to allow full augmentation of PLAs, "it is allowed" can support an additional reading--the one you identified--in which "may" means "only these things are allowed". This is based on the assumption that "may" would not be used in a context where it is superfluous, and, since the ability to augment have already been given, "may" must be used to restrict it.

I personally don't think that "only this is allowed" is meant, and that it's likely just an explanation of the rules (which WotC is known to do, and cause problems with), but it is technically up for debate. Regardless, though: in RAW debate we don't go and add additional assumptions, especially if they add restrictions like "only"; the remaining readings ("it is allowed" and "it is possible") concur with the general rule that PLAs can be augmented in any way.

@liquidformat: The second half of your argument only applies to the presentation of monster stats in the EPH, not to psionic creatures in general. That's why I haven't discussed it further; rules that only apply to the presentation of official stat blocks don't interest me as much. In any case, just because powers that aren't augmented contain no special notation, doesn't mean they can't be augmented later on (for example, if the DM advances a creature and adds additional manifester levels). WotC stat block guidelines can never replace your own application of the rules.

I'm done with liquidformat's rudeness, so unless someone else wants to discuss PLA augmentation (exciting topic of the week! :smalltongue:), let's return to business as usual.

Grey Guard

2019-06-13, 05:46 PM

They're slightly better since psi-likes actually scale with ML. I'd say the difference is enough that I'll always pick psionic over normal, but not enough that it actually changes the LA. Not sure if I'd actually play a Duergar at +1 though... stability is alright, huge darkvision is ok, the psi-likes aren't terrible, but there's nothing here that really sells me on losing a class level the way a huge strength bonus and powerful build might.

CL/ML 3 or HD for expansion and invisibility... that's not bad. It's too strong for LA +0, but I don't think I'd play one at +1... that's just personal preference, though.

I don't think that's right. "When a creature uses a psi-like ability, the power is manifested as if the creature had spent a number of power points equal to its manifester level" is pretty definitive. Whether it's mentioned in the stat block is just bookkeeping--I wouldn't like the "reading psionic creature entries" text to override the general rule on PLAs.

For invisibility, the EPH (and SRD) has got you covered: "In some cases, a creature’s psi-like abilities may include an effect that does not duplicate any power in this book. For such abilities, treat the creature’s manifester level as the caster level for the spell" (paraphrased). Duergar are mentioned as example.

I know that there are very few actually correct WotC statblocks, but ... it'd be really weird to limit PLAs to augmenting only DC and damage when so many augmented powers in statblocks don't change DC or damage. On the psi-aboleth alone, there's false sensory input, mindlink and thought shield. Can we chalk this up to "WotC writers don't create their work as carefully as thousands of readers later analyze it"?

I vote LA +1 for the psi-duergar. It's not a +1 I'd want to play, but immunity to poison is a strong argument that they're better than +0.

LA +1 on the Psi-Duergar. Not something I am interested in, but a little too much for a level playing field against standard races.

I'm very amused by a lot of this. I see a lot of +1 LA votes, with the caveat that the person wouldn't play it. That strikes me as worrying, because the race gets too much, but not enough to make it worth taking the level hit.

I love dwarves, and duergar are probably my favorite 'almost' standard race. It's a whole race of angrier than normal dwarves, that can ALL turn invisible, and ALL hulk out in giant mode. I can't see them losing a traditional war against any other standard race. Even Drow would struggle with that, I feel.

As for an LA... I'm torn. In my home games, they don't get a LA. But we've done that for a lot of LA +1 races, and bumped up LA 0 races, so it's hard to make that call.

The stats are fine (don't play anything needing Charisma), the psi-likes are fun, but nothing special. Stability is fine, super darkvision good. Light Blindness can kinda hurt in most games, but it's fine when you hit the dungeon. The immunities are where this guy shines. The phantasms one is neat, but I don't think it's going to be super relevant in most games. Immunity to poison will probably find a decent use, honestly, in a lot of encounters. It's hard to rate this, but most games will probably place a stigma on your character choice, and you may not be welcome in most civilized towns, so that could be a con to the race as well.

Is this enough to warrant the level hit? Would a level in a class be better? Is this worth it?

In the end, I think I'm going to buck the trend and go with +0. If LA Buyoff is allowed (and I know that's not assumed), I like making these guys +1, but I don't feel like their abilities warrant losing a class level. Some neat 1/day tricks are cool, and that poison immunity is super amazing when you play with Drow as neighbors.

I don't think the people who voted +1 are wrong, but when everyone's saying "+1, but I'd never play one.", it sounds like it may not be worth +1.

Caelestion

2019-06-13, 06:41 PM

Psionic duergar are like normal duergar, in that they're dwarves, but simply better. Dwarves are hardly known for being one of the weaker PHB races and duergar get all that and more besides. They're obviously LA +1.

Thurbane

2019-06-13, 06:59 PM

Mike Miller

2019-06-13, 07:09 PM

I vote +0. I think they are a strong +0, but I think what makes them potentially a +1 drops away fast enough that it isn't worth it. If there was LA buyoff, I would be fine with +1. Basically, I agree with Grey Guard's assessment.

Zaq

2019-06-13, 10:11 PM

I straight up would not play one at +1. +1 is overpriced.

I agree that they're a wee bit stronger than I'm comfortable with at +0, but I would not ever take one at +1. Ever. The benefit does not match the cost. What they get is straight up not worth a class level. It's not worth forever being behind on BAB, saves, skill ranks, HP, caster/manifester/class level progression, feat progression, and anything else that happens to be based on HD.

Honestly, +0 is fine. Hell, I forgot that you only get expansion and invisibility 1/day each until you start blowing feats, so by the time you've got them a noticeable number of times per day, you've paid a more than fair price.

In fact, I'ma go back and strike out what I said about them being stronger than I like at +0. They're fine at +0.

Remuko

2019-06-13, 11:42 PM

given recent comments i want to clarify that my previous comment on this entry was a vote for +0.

Prime32

2019-06-14, 07:49 PM

Both kinds of duergar are on the weaker side of LA +1, but also a significant upgrade to standard dwarves.

The standard duergar can pull off some cheese with its inflated racial CL. Psionic duergar's ML isn't quite as high, but it's still the best any psionic race has access to without feats. The only uses I can think of for this right now are... item creation feats, and easy access to Thrallherd (which you could dip for 1 level even if you don't have any manifesting to progress).

Complete Psionic has feats which let them use their racial PLAs +2/day. Champions of Valor has feats which allow a duergar to spend 5pp to fuel one of their SLAs, and under a generous reading could be used by psionic duergar to access standard duergar SLAs (though it's still easier to just be a standard duergar with psion levels, unless your DM doesn't allow that combination or something).

liquidformat

2019-06-14, 09:34 PM

You may (sorry) have a point there; "may" can express "it is allowed" or "it is possible", and though either can be read to allow full augmentation of PLAs, "it is allowed" can support an additional reading--the one you identified--in which "may" means "only these things are allowed". This is based on the assumption that "may" would not be used in a context where it is superfluous, and, since the ability to augment have already been given, "may" must be used to restrict it.

I personally don't think that "only this is allowed" is meant, and that it's likely just an explanation of the rules (which WotC is known to do, and cause problems with), but it is technically up for debate. Regardless, though: in RAW debate we don't go and add additional assumptions, especially if they add restrictions like "only"; the remaining readings ("it is allowed" and "it is possible") concur with the general rule that PLAs can be augmented in any way.

@liquidformat: The second half of your argument only applies to the presentation of monster stats in the EPH, not to psionic creatures in general. That's why I haven't discussed it further; rules that only apply to the presentation of official stat blocks don't interest me as much. In any case, just because powers that aren't augmented contain no special notation, doesn't mean they can't be augmented later on (for example, if the DM advances a creature and adds additional manifester levels). WotC stat block guidelines can never replace your own application of the rules.

I'm done with liquidformat's rudeness, so unless someone else wants to discuss PLA augmentation (exciting topic of the week! :smalltongue:), let's return to business as usual.

What are you talking about, individual powers aren't even presented in the stat block. The second half of the argument is talking about the creature entry, specifically the psi-like abilities in the creature entry not the stat block. The fact that psi-likes are pre augmented and the sentence 'Powers that can’t be augmented, or that are manifested at their normal minimum level, do not contain any special notations.' seems to strongly contradict your inclusive interpretation of 'may' and support the exclusive meaning.

Also it isn't rude to point out you are miss quoting things to support your argument, if anything your behavior throughout this debate has been quite questionable and insulting.

Windcaller

2019-06-17, 02:30 PM

Psionic Druergar is a tricky one, but that kind of case seems to be common around here. He has two strong immunities and good, well balanced ability score adjustments. Taking that into consideration, I don't think he deserves the +1, for he is quite similar to the Warforged. Then we get to their Psi-Like Abilities. Both are good ones, but both are limited. I didn't read all that bull**** about it being able to augment its PLAs or not (sorry), but if they can, using Expansion to get huge at ECL 8 is more than enough for me to use the race regardless of LA. If it isn't possible, maybe having Invisibily at ECL 1 would still be a bit too strong. With that said, I vote for +1 as well, but I would probably allow LA buyoff or/and maybe give it some kind of savage progression for Invisibility.

GreatWyrmGold

2019-06-17, 04:09 PM

...

Not every "it's not a restriction" argument is immediately an argument that anything goes. Your examples make you look ridiculous.
Of course it does when you remove the part where I justify my example.

I'm very amused by a lot of this. I see a lot of +1 LA votes, with the caveat that the person wouldn't play it. That strikes me as worrying, because the race gets too much, but not enough to make it worth taking the level hit.

...

I don't think the people who voted +1 are wrong, but when everyone's saying "+1, but I'd never play one.", it sounds like it may not be worth +1.
That's a core problem with the graininess of level adjustment. There's not really a good box to put a race like the duergar who are obviously too much for +1 and not enough for +0. There's not enough to justify losing a level, but there's too much to justify taking most standard races instead if your party role could benefit from the duergar's racial abilities (and most melee classes would qualify). If this was a proper homebrew thread where we rebuilt monsters to be good PC races, we could give them some buffs (maybe more daily uses of their powers?), but it isn't, so...

lord_khaine

2019-06-18, 03:32 AM

I think Psionic RA debate might as well die her.
The wording of it is apperently sufficienly unclear that you can read it in more than one way if you want to.
And at this stage both sides have likely dug themselves to far in to budge a centimeter.

Grey Guard

2019-06-18, 08:29 AM

That's a core problem with the graininess of level adjustment. There's not really a good box to put a race like the duergar who are obviously too much for +1 and not enough for +0. There's not enough to justify losing a level, but there's too much to justify taking most standard races instead if your party role could benefit from the duergar's racial abilities (and most melee classes would qualify). If this was a proper homebrew thread where we rebuilt monsters to be good PC races, we could give them some buffs (maybe more daily uses of their powers?), but it isn't, so...

Yeah. This is why in my home games these guys don't even get a LA. To be fair, they ARE Dwarf+, but not enough + to have an LA IMHO. They'll never be worth taking a level hit with what they have. Even if they had more uses of their Psi-Likes, Invisibility and Expansion are COOL, don't get me wrong, and even quite powerful in the early game. Eventually their usefulness will peter out though, as you get to the higher levels.

Besides, there are feats that give you more uses of their powers from Complete Psionic. I feel like if you're spending feats on getting more uses of those, instead of going with whatever build you're doing, that seems like a more than fair trade to me. I agree with Zaq on that one.

Inevitability

2019-06-19, 03:11 PM

Sorry for the missed update: life's still a bit busy but updates should be back to normal now.

Anyway, the duergar got +1 pretty consistently, with a minority voting +0 instead. Time for elans!

Inevitability

2019-06-19, 03:19 PM

Elan

https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/forgottenrealms/images/d/de/Elan.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20090427203307

My apologies to those expecting foolish blonde bards.

Elan are a fascinating race concept: immortal lifeforms with some unique psychic powers, created for some unknown purpose by a mysterious council. It's a pity no setting I know of actually uses this for anything.

Anyway, their powers are pretty on-par with those of a +0 LA race. A rather insignificant -2 charisma is compensated for by two free power points (not one: the errata corrects the book on this), as well as the ability to use PP for damage reduction, a saving throw bonus, or nutrition. They also get the aberration type, which opens up some interesting possibilities (alter self shenanigans, rapidstrike).

Would I play elans over other +0 races? For the right character, I definitely would. Considering their unique blend of up- and downsides, I think it's more than fair to declare them on par with your typical PHB race, so +0 LA it is.

Efrate

2019-06-19, 03:45 PM

Elans are a fun +0. You can get some neat weird stuff but nothing gamebreaking.

liquidformat

2019-06-19, 04:05 PM

Seems lower end of +0 but not bad, aberration makes you immune to charm person which is nice but you are also immune to enlarge person which is lame...

ViperMagnum357

2019-06-19, 04:08 PM

as well as the ability to use PP for damage reduction, a saving throw bonus

It is important to note those Immediate actions are, respectively, typeless damage mitigation, and a racial bonus on saving throws, which are much more difficult to acquire if you are locked into another race already. Obviously this is a somewhat subpar choice without psionic classes somewhere in the build; but a bipedal aberration with hands and typical slots, and will never starve or die of thirst, is at least something to consider on its own for no RHD. But did they really have to strip the Darkvision? Almost everyone else gets enhanced vision, but this gets stuck in the baseline Human eyesight category.

Overall, LA +0 from me. Decent though highly specific; if you are not going psionic or intending to take advantage of the type, look elsewhere.

No brains

2019-06-19, 04:15 PM

Seems lower end of +0 but not bad, aberration makes you immune to charm person which is nice but you are also immune to enlarge person which is lame...

Doesn't psionic expansion affect everything though?

jindra34

2019-06-19, 04:34 PM

Doesn't psionic expansion affect everything though?

It always effects yourself regardless of typing. So yes and no.

danielxcutter

2019-06-19, 04:48 PM

Elan are a fascinating race concept: immortal lifeforms with some unique psychic powers, created for some unknown purpose by a mysterious council. It's a pity no setting I know of actually uses this for anything.

Eberron has a very interesting twist on them though; in that setting they're basically living Quori prisons. And probably also qualifies them for those sweet Quori shards.

Thurbane

2019-06-19, 04:54 PM

Again, I have very limited knowledge of psionics, but from what I can see, the Elan are a quite solid LA +0 race. Not quite enough for LA +1, but solid nonetheless.

remetagross

2019-06-19, 05:43 PM

Yup, LA +0 for Elans. I'd play one over playing, say, a Human, for some builds. Like the "easy mode" Wizard I once heard about - Elan Wizard 20, who takes that feat to boost the Elan's damage reduction to 4/pp expended, and then takes Psionic Talent for every other feat. A self-imposed nerf while at the same time making for a surprisingly tough caster.

Covenant12

2019-06-19, 07:25 PM

I think they are worse than human, but there are still times I'd take them over human. +0.

-2 total stats isn't good, but Cha is generally 6th place there. Aberration type can matter and even be abused on occasion. 2 PP's that can be used to buff yourself mildly or not need to eat. Maybe not human/dwarf/whisper gnome good, but it does quite well in narrow uses, and is never awful. Far better than half-elf, say.

Zaq

2019-06-19, 07:43 PM

Elans are a pretty easy +0.

Dimers

2019-06-19, 08:34 PM

Elan are a fascinating race concept: immortal lifeforms with some unique psychic powers, created for some unknown purpose by a mysterious council. It's a pity no setting I know of actually uses this for anything.

The treatment they got in 4e is a little more thorough. Different, though; 'elan' is basically a template that anyone can gain via a Heritage-style feat. So you get human elans, elf elans, warforged elans, gnoll elans ... revenant pixie elans ...

I fully agree with +0.

Windcaller

2019-06-19, 09:46 PM

I'll just go along with everyone. Elan is by no means powerful enough to deserve +1.

GreatWyrmGold

2019-06-19, 10:44 PM

Elan are a fascinating race concept: immortal lifeforms with some unique psychic powers, created for some unknown purpose by a mysterious council. It's a pity no setting I know of actually uses this for anything.
As far as "cool concepts introduced in a sourcebook that no setting uses for anything," I prefer the Illumians from Races of Destiny. They're basically humans who imbued themselves with a magical language and live apart from society in neat enclaves. I know that doesn't sound that cool, but they have a chapter devoted to them and other flavor stuff scattered throughout the book. The only thing I'd change is to make them a level adjustment +1 template (giving all Illumian abilities plus the original race's) instead of a separate race, because the idea of such enclaves being exclusively (ex-)human bothers me. (Not surprising, for the "human sourcebook," but still.)
Speaking of which, RoD has a ton of weird human-derived races that might be worth a look. Plenty are obvious +0's, but some have enough abilities (and often even RHD) to earn the LA-assignment treatment. Maybe add it to the list of things to vote on after the MM4?

Grey Guard

2019-06-20, 12:14 PM

Elan are a fascinating race concept: immortal lifeforms with some unique psychic powers, created for some unknown purpose by a mysterious council. It's a pity no setting I know of actually uses this for anything.

As was mentioned above, Eberron had some cool alternate fluff for them as living quori prisons. Other than that, they are criminally under-utilized. I've played an Elan twice, once as a Psychic Warrior/Illithid Slayer, and another as a Artificer/Xelor, and neither time did the DM explore more on the fluff of them, which kinda made me sad.

Considering I went full Mindflayer hunter in the first game, I would've almost liked for the Elans to join the "We Hate Mindflayers Club" that the Gith and Duergar are in. All EPH races, all potentially united in some sweet mutual hatred of squid heads.

That said, after playing as this race, twice, in games that went from levels 5-18, they're an easy +0 LA. The Psychic Warrior was extraordinarily difficult to kill, which was fun. The artificer's race choice was one of practicality. He had a mission, and didn't know how long it would take, and that seemed like the safest route to immortality. Playing one with only 2 PP for your racials was not what I would call awesome. The occasional bonus to saves, twice a day, was cool? Certainly not worth it, though.

As far as "cool concepts introduced in a sourcebook that no setting uses for anything," I prefer the Illumians from Races of Destiny. They're basically humans who imbued themselves with a magical language and live apart from society in neat enclaves. I know that doesn't sound that cool, but they have a chapter devoted to them and other flavor stuff scattered throughout the book.

Illumians were cool. In a game I was in once, we used Teleport Through Time to visit ancient Netheril, and the DM had made all the High Netherese living on the floating cities, oozing with magic, Illumians. Was cool.

javcs

2019-06-20, 02:02 PM

Elans aren't completely terrible, but they aren't that good either. They're underwhelming, at best.

They also have the dubious distinction of being one of the few intended-as-PC races that have net negative ability scores.

Are we completely sure that WotC didn't epically drop the ball and the -2 Cha was actually supposed to be a +2 Cha and the mistake was never noticed?

From what little fluff there is for the Elan, I half feel like maybe they should be a humans-only template. Or maybe get at least some of a regular human's racials, and/or get access to things (feats, PRCs, etc) as a human would.

As is, they're pretty clearly a +0. And not a particularly good one.
I'd only play an Elan if there was a strong in-game/story reason to do so, or if I were planning a very specific build to take advantage of either the aberration type or maybe one of their power point powered racial abilities.

OgresAreCute

2019-06-20, 02:48 PM

Are we completely sure that WotC didn't epically drop the ball and the -2 Cha was actually supposed to be a +2 Cha and the mistake was never noticed?

Absolutely, if they had net +2 charisma with no penalty they would be +1 LA.

Anyway, can't see any reason not to put these as +0.

GreatWyrmGold

2019-06-20, 04:05 PM

Considering I went full Mindflayer hunter in the first game, I would've almost liked for the Elans to join the "We Hate Mindflayers Club" that the Gith and Duergar are in. All EPH races, all potentially united in some sweet mutual hatred of squid heads.
For a race that apparently had a big empire going on, and which needs to eat the brains of sentient creatures to survive, there are surprisingly few races who hate illithids. I guess that when there are as many monster races as there are in D&D, you only have the energy to hate the ones which are currently threatening you?

Are we completely sure that WotC didn't epically drop the ball and the -2 Cha was actually supposed to be a +2 Cha and the mistake was never noticed?
I vaguely recall them giving a reason for the elans being less socially-competent (standard jibber-jabber about how living longer than an arbitrary human lifespan distances themselves from mere mortals or something), so probably not.

From what little fluff there is for the Elan, I half feel like maybe they should be a humans-only template. Or maybe get at least some of a regular human's racials, and/or get access to things (feats, PRCs, etc) as a human would.
I'm not surprised they didn't. Elans (like Illumians) were designed as a race you build something on top of, not as a power-up to a pre-existing being. Whether or not this was the best way to handle creating something with the fluff those two races got, it was the best way to fulfill WotC's design goals (presumably "a normal-looking psionic race" and "a new human-derived race that exemplifies the traits of humanity we think are remarkable".)

unseenmage

2019-06-20, 04:10 PM

...

I'm not surprised they didn't. Elans (like Illumians) were designed as a race you build something on top of, not as a power-up to a pre-existing being. Whether or not this was the best way to handle creating something with the fluff those two races got, it was the best way to fulfill WotC's design goals (presumably "a normal-looking psionic race" and "a new human-derived race that exemplifies the traits of humanity we think are remarkable".)
Comparatively both the Dragonborn egg genesis thing and Necropolitan are both a mess. And that other race, the one that which is a soul returned from it's bad end seeking a fresh start or whatever.
All three are pseudo templates like the Illumian and Elan and all three are so poorly implemented by comparison that they have constant RAW Qs posts and threads.

javcs

2019-06-20, 04:41 PM

Comparatively both the Dragonborn egg genesis thing and Necropolitan are both a mess. And that other race, the one that which is a soul returned from it's bad end seeking a fresh start or whatever.
All three are pseudo templates like the Illumian and Elan and all three are so poorly implemented by comparison that they have constant RAW Qs posts and threads.

Eh, Dragonborn is super funky.
But I thought Necropolitan was mostly a regular template.

Hellbourne or something, I think. From FC2?
Yeah, the fluff sounds like it should probably be a template, but the crunch is a pure base race. I think it's a little bit like the soul gets reincarnated(concept, not spell) to start over, though.

Grey Guard

2019-06-20, 06:26 PM

For a race that apparently had a big empire going on, and which needs to eat the brains of sentient creatures to survive, there are surprisingly few races who hate illithids. I guess that when there are as many monster races as there are in D&D, you only have the energy to hate the ones which are currently threatening you?

I mean, a secret council of immortal psionicists? What's the endgame? What are their goals? Were it me, I'd honestly say they were humans who discovered the Illithid threat, and watch and hunt them- eternally. There's about a billion ways to handle "secret immortal council with mind magic", though.

PoeticallyPsyco

2019-06-20, 06:34 PM

I've been rereading Weapons of Legacy, and one of them (the Simple Bow) actually does feature Elans in its backstory. Nothing about their overarching goals, though.

Dimers

2019-06-20, 06:38 PM

Are we completely sure that WotC didn't epically drop the ball and the -2 Cha was actually supposed to be a +2 Cha and the mistake was never noticed?

If so, the mistake was compounded when they described it in XPH (with the assumption that Charisma is about making other people feel good): elans be creepy.

Celestia

2019-06-21, 05:50 AM

Zaq

2019-06-21, 08:25 AM

I always thought it was more appropriate if the elans were the ones who eventually become the illithids.

Psionic
Aberrations
Can’t reproduce normally but instead transform humans/humanoids into more of their kind

Story checks out.

Grey Guard

2019-06-21, 09:30 AM

No brains

2019-06-21, 11:31 AM

Psionic
Aberrations
Can’t reproduce normally but instead transform humans/humanoids into more of their kind

Story checks out.

I can't quite agree with this because illithids do reproduce naturally, it's just that their natural form is an asexual worm that grows huge. If there is a link between the two, somebody may have jacked the elan recipe and tried to use it to uplift worms, inadvertently creating the mind flayers. Maybe Kyuss is in there somewhere. That jerk loves worms.

Not to mention that elans can live way longer- without food/ brains- than mind flayers can.

I'm also biased because one time I theorycrafted someone who template stacked transformations to live forever. I think they were a human>elan>dragonborn>mindflayer who lived for like 2700 years.

Celestia

2019-06-21, 12:19 PM

I can't quite agree with this because illithids do reproduce naturally, it's just that their natural form is an asexual worm that grows huge. If there is a link between the two, somebody may have jacked the elan recipe and tried to use it to uplift worms, inadvertently creating the mind flayers. Maybe Kyuss is in there somewhere. That jerk loves worms.

Not to mention that elans can live way longer- without food/ brains- than mind flayers can.

I'm also biased because one time I theorycrafted someone who template stacked transformations to live forever. I think they were a human>elan>dragonborn>mindflayer who lived for like 2700 years.
It could still work. First, elans are, in lore at least, not a true "race" of their own. They are more like ascended humans who achieve immortality through some outside force. I mean, you wouldn't call a 20th level monk a separate race even if they're no longer strictly "human." In addition, being dependent upon recruiting outside members to grow one's numbers is an inherent weakness, a weakness that I could believe they'd try to eliminate.

My theory is that at some point, the elans got tired of just being a secret society and sought out more. So, they did experiments upon themselves and altered the transformation ritual to try becoming a real, self-sustaining race. This ultimately altered their physiology, creating the squid face illithids.

Alternatively, I just came up with another theory that I actually like more. The elans created themselves and their society in direct opposition to the illithids, figuring that timeless bodies would be perfect for fighting beings from the future. Eventually, theynrealize they don't have the power to actually defeat the illithids and begin augmenting themselves with illithid power hoping to fight fire with fire. Eventually, they win and utterly destroy the illithids and put a stop to the second empire, but in the process, they become the original illithids and form the first empire. It's a perfect closed time loop.

liquidformat

2019-06-21, 12:37 PM

It could still work. First, elans are, in lore at least, not a true "race" of their own. They are more like ascended humans who achieve immortality through some outside force. I mean, you wouldn't call a 20th level monk a separate race even if they're no longer strictly "human." In addition, being dependent upon recruiting outside members to grow one's numbers is an inherent weakness, a weakness that I could believe they'd try to eliminate.

My theory is that at some point, the elans got tired of just being a secret society and sought out more. So, they did experiments upon themselves and altered the transformation ritual to try becoming a real, self-sustaining race. This ultimately altered their physiology, creating the squid face illithids.

Alternatively, I just came up with another theory that I actually like more. The elans created themselves and their society in direct opposition to the illithids, figuring that timeless bodies would be perfect for fighting beings from the future. Eventually, theynrealize they don't have the power to actually defeat the illithids and begin augmenting themselves with illithid power hoping to fight fire with fire. Eventually, they win and utterly destroy the illithids and put a stop to the second empire, but in the process, they become the original illithids and form the first empire. It's a perfect closed time loop.

Or we could combine the worm thing with the illithid and use goa'uld to tie it all up with a nice pretty bow!

So Illithid have worm babies which although they can survive in birthing pools can't grow into adults that way. As such they implant them into people's spines which creates elan, a race that has achieved quasi immortality through a symbiotic relationship between host and baby illithid. The growth rate of a illithid baby into an adult isn't set so sometimes it can take a couple months other times millennia or maybe never. Furthermore, they subside off of a small portion of brain fluid which effects the social aspects of the brain hence -2 charisma. When the baby illithid does become an adult the baby illithid eats the person's brain and explodes out the skull becoming the squid heads we all know and love!

GreatWyrmGold

2019-06-21, 03:04 PM

I mean, a secret council of immortal psionicists? What's the endgame? What are their goals? Were it me, I'd honestly say they were humans who discovered the Illithid threat, and watch and hunt them- eternally. There's about a billion ways to handle "secret immortal council with mind magic", though.
One idea I've been kicking around, tied to the "illithids are from the future" idea, is that they're working on putting together the empire they know they'll have in the future. They know that they'll succeed, so they're perfectly willing to take any risk that might destroy illithids or crucial artifacts if they fail, because they know it won't. On the other hand, they're terrified of slightly smaller risks, because they could come to pass.

I can't quite agree with this because illithids do reproduce naturally, it's just that their natural form is an asexual worm that grows huge. If there is a link between the two, somebody may have jacked the elan recipe and tried to use it to uplift worms, inadvertently creating the mind flayers. Maybe Kyuss is in there somewhere. That jerk loves worms.
This whole discussion sent my mind going in an almost-unrelated direction.
Has anyone here read Animorphs? Specifically the one where they fight Howlers on a tangled staircase maze inhabited by a comically-capitalistic symbiotic species called the Iskoort? I'm imagining what could be with illithid larvae as the yoort and elans as the isk. Combining the incredible psionic abilities of the illithid and the...extant psionic abilities of the elan to create an Elathid (or whatever you want to call it) would, by storyteller logic, give them enough power to seriously oppose the Illithids.

Alternatively, I just came up with another theory that I actually like more. The elans created themselves and their society in direct opposition to the illithids, figuring that timeless bodies would be perfect for fighting beings from the future. Eventually, theynrealize they don't have the power to actually defeat the illithids and begin augmenting themselves with illithid power hoping to fight fire with fire. Eventually, they win and utterly destroy the illithids and put a stop to the second empire, but in the process, they become the original illithids and form the first empire. It's a perfect closed time loop.
Also interesting, but more...conventional. Very "you can't fight fate," and that's a theme I've always been kinda meh on.

danielxcutter

2019-06-21, 04:44 PM

For a race that apparently had a big empire going on, and which needs to eat the brains of sentient creatures to survive, there are surprisingly few races who hate illithids. I guess that when there are as many monster races as there are in D&D, you only have the energy to hate the ones which are currently threatening you?

I think here "hate" means "hate more than usual"; gith were specifically made as slave races for the flayers IIRC.

Hey, how do gith work in Eberron again?

Prime32

2019-06-21, 08:06 PM

Hey, how do gith work in Eberron again?
They used to live on another world of some kind, then the daelkyr destroyed it and warped some of them into the first mind flayers. Maybe.

They were on Eberron during the Xoriat invasion and escaped when it was cut off - most travelled to other planes but a small number of them settled in remote places like Khyber and Xen'drik. Some githzerai have a monastery in Adar, built in a manifest zone to not-Limbo.

Inevitability

2019-06-22, 05:26 PM

Folugub

https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/sfery/images/2/26/Folugub.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20090519163145

Psionic, crystal-eating aberrations with four HD. The parallels with rust monsters are obvious, except folugubs just kind of fail to perform a similar role.

At low level, even a fully psionic party will probably own more metal items than crystal ones. This is especially true at low levels, when a dumb CR 2 monster like this is most relevant. The only way in which I could see one of those actually harm the party is by means of something like a trap set to drop fogulubs on the party psion, or something, which would be effective but hardly fun.

Stat-wise, folugubs are unimpressive. +6 constitution and dexterity, +2 wisdom, -8 intelligence, no thumbs, a weak 2d4 natural bite, scent, and 'Liquify Crystal', an ability that lets the folugub waste its one attack a turn on liquifying a piece of crystal loot. Good job, that's totally as useful as a regular 4th-level PC.

If it wasn't obvious enough, folugubs are terrible monsters, terrible PCs, and do not deserve anything other than -0 LA.

Mike Miller

2019-06-22, 05:29 PM

Yup. Definitely -0

Efrate

2019-06-22, 05:40 PM

Easy -0. Maybe some kind of weird summon vs. like gem golems? No idea in which way they are ever useful.

javcs

2019-06-22, 06:30 PM

I think they're supposed to be the psionic item equivalent of a rust monster.

LA -0.

ViperMagnum357

2019-06-22, 07:06 PM

Crystal themed Rust Monster=fail on many levels, including the chance to be a viable PC choice. This is certainly LA -0, easily.

PoeticallyPsyco

2019-06-23, 02:01 AM

Great from an evolutionary standpoint. Terrible from every other standpoint. -0

Zaq

2019-06-23, 08:21 AM

Why does this even exist? -0.

Covenant12

2019-06-23, 10:04 AM

Yeah, this is flat awful. 3/4 BAB, no skills, medium size with one 2d4 bite attack. +0 Str, +6 Dex but you have to pay for weapon finesse.

You are a long ways from mouthpick weapons becoming affordable. I'd allow custom barding but you'd need help to take it off or put it back on.

Darkvision and scent, but without skills eventually that's not good at all.

I'd take any PHB race rogue, or any dwarf/half-orc fighter20/barbarian20 over this guy. He's basically a rust monster tailored to the one psionics user the DM has grown to hate.

LA: -0

GreatWyrmGold

2019-06-23, 01:38 PM

Why does this even exist? -0.
To make a psionic version of an iconic D&D monster. Why they chose the rust monster and not the beholder is beyond me.

liquidformat

2019-06-23, 02:49 PM

To make a psionic version of an iconic D&D monster. Why they chose the rust monster and not the beholder is beyond me.

Because they already did psionic squid heads and aboleth?...

Either way -0 for sure!

Zaq

2019-06-24, 12:45 PM

To make a psionic version of an iconic D&D monster. Why they chose the rust monster and not the beholder is beyond me.

Like, I get that, but this is a really stupid way to do it. For all the guff we give the XPH about slinging crystals everywhere, even most psionic characters just don’t have enough crystals on their person in targetable spots to make this thing rage-inducing like the rust monster is.

I mean, the rust monster is a terrible design choice and I’m kind of glad that they didn’t accidentally make a version that’s even more annoying, but they still failed at what they attempted even if what they attempted is dumb.

javcs

2019-06-24, 01:43 PM

Like, I get that, but this is a really stupid way to do it. For all the guff we give the XPH about slinging crystals everywhere, even most psionic characters just don’t have enough crystals on their person in targetable spots to make this thing rage-inducing like the rust monster is.

I mean, the rust monster is a terrible design choice and I’m kind of glad that they didn’t accidentally make a version that’s even more annoying, but they still failed at what they attempted even if what they attempted is dumb.

Well ... I dunno. It depends on just how fragile the item magic/psionics actually are.
I mean ... it's one thing if the entire item needs to be crystal to get screwed over, but if it was created with one or more inlaid gemstones/crystals and popping one of them is enough to destabilize the magic ... that could maybe be more useful, since blinged out items probably aren't that uncommon.
But that's a purely DM by DM, table by table, type decision.

And they'd almost definitely be brutal on someone reliant on weapon/armor crystals.

On the other hand ... there's a whole lot less utility in eating gemstones compared to a rust monster eating metals.
Gemstones, and other crystals, are more likely to be loot than obstacles. After all, a rust monster can eat a lock. Or parts of a trap. But it's not going to be very common for crystals/gemstones to be the kind of obstacle you want to make a hole through.

GreatWyrmGold

2019-06-24, 02:15 PM

Well ... I dunno. It depends on just how fragile the item magic/psionics actually are.
I mean ... it's one thing if the entire item needs to be crystal to get screwed over, but if it was created with one or more inlaid gemstones/crystals and popping one of them is enough to destabilize the magic ... that could maybe be more useful, since blinged out items probably aren't that uncommon.
But that's a purely DM by DM, table by table, type decision.
Just find one of the magic-item-eating monsters scattered about through the sourcebooks and blend it with a giant beetle. Easier to adjudicate that way.

Dimers

2019-06-25, 08:38 AM

Not that my vote is really needed here, but yeah, -0.

@javcs: Even then, the Crysmal has the gem-destroying function without being otherwise completely worthless. (Just mostly worthless.)

Inevitability

2019-06-25, 11:24 AM

Gith, Psionic

https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/forgottenrealms/images/8/8c/Gith-5e.png/revision/latest?cb=20180816011608

A two-for-one update? You've gith to be kidding me!

Anyway, it's y'alls favorite pale skinny astrals, except now with proper psionics. Both the githyanki and githzerai got +1 LA way back when they got rated in 2017.

Githzerai

Unsurprisingly, more-or-less on par with their nonpsionic cousins. Stats are quite good, two bonus PP is nice too. Power Resistance does basically the same as Spell Resistance, low-level PLAs are okay, Plane Shift at level 11 is icing. +1 LA once more.

Githyanki

Low ability adjustments, but good PLAs (including Plane Shift at level 9) and a whole three bonus power points. Probably +1 again, though the better PLAs make me consider assigning +2 instead.

Efrate

2019-06-25, 02:06 PM

+1 for each. They both quite reasonable upgrades from the base races.

liquidformat

2019-06-25, 03:18 PM

They both seem to still fall into +1

ViperMagnum357

2019-06-25, 04:01 PM

LA +1 for both.

Thurbane

2019-06-25, 05:33 PM

Again, no expert on psionics, but eyeballing these LA +1 for each sounds right.

Windcaller

2019-06-26, 12:52 PM

Doesn't seem like Githzerai is good enough for +2. Both should be +1.

Inevitability

2019-06-28, 01:19 PM

Gray Glutton

https://66.media.tumblr.com/9dcb803b050ce7ad8775bca60bfecadc/tumblr_inline_pay3kkCjWb1rkapbx_400.jpg

The gray glutton prefers to spend its time posing threateningly on the perfectly clean skulls of its dead foes, as 2 int monsters are of course wont to do.

Snark aside, the Glutton has a semi-promising chassis. Huge size is neat, and 27 strength is hardly bad. Constitution, wisdom, and surprisingly charisma all get reasonable bonuses too. Although all this is at the cost of 9 RHD, it's magical beast RHD which makes it a bit more manageable.

Natural weapons are a 2d8 bite and two 2d6 claws. Based on claw shape I think it's fair to argue they can wield weapons, but don't expect any DM to echo that sentiment. Scent is hardly worth mentioning, PR 20 is probably a net positive, and finally there's their main ability: Null Psionic Exhalation.

Some naive fools, like me, might have read that name and expected something similar to Null Psionic Field. Getting what amounts to an AMF at ECL 9, is actually kind of a Big Deal, as even wizards don't get it until level 11. Of course, it couldn't quite be that good.

Instead, Null Psionic Exhalation is a free action, usable every 4 rounds, that spreads poison. Said poison's sole effect is to remove a few power points from its victims, and in a game where the average psion foe will have over seventy power points I doubt 1d4 will make much of an impact. The effect doesn't even count as a breath weapon, so it can't be exploited that way either.

While the gray glutton offers the appealing combination of 27 strength, huge size, and thumbs, its lack of real other abilities makes me slightly skeptical as to how useful it'll be in a real game. That said, for now I'll go ahead and assign it +0. I'm half expecting it to drop to -0 though.

Zaq

2019-06-28, 01:31 PM

9 RHD is way too many for having no real abilities and nothing that scales. Even the numbers aren’t sufficiently numbery to really be that impressive when we’re talking about that many HD, and -8 INT is genuinely painful even if you just want to be a brute.

Count me as -0.

liquidformat

2019-06-28, 01:40 PM

-8 int, -2 dex, no scaling abilities (only one ability) 9 rhd, ya this thing is -0 for sure.

With that said if Null Psionic Exhalation actually did make a Null Psionic Field every 4 rounds I think that would be enough for a +0. At that point just take 2 levels of barbarian for pounce and trip and hop right into war hulk to ruin everyone's day...

ViperMagnum357

2019-06-28, 01:56 PM

LA -0 on this thing. Snazzy visual design aside, this is basically just a big chunk of HP with one ability, and the only things par for size/RHD are above average natural AC and typical natural attack dice. It is slow for a Huge biped, it has the net abilities of 7 RHD, and apart from the exhalation all you get are mediocre senses, non-scaling PR, and Track as a bonus feat.

Speaking of the exhalation, you could see RAW arguments for whether or not it qualifies as poison; taking an already weak and situational ability and complicating it by perhaps rendering it useless by the third or fourth most common immunity is not a selling point.

lord_khaine

2019-06-28, 02:15 PM

+1 on this thing.
It might not be good at more than a single thing.
But its also very well suited for being a melee bruiser.

DeTess

2019-06-28, 03:54 PM

The most straightforward comparison would be a barbarian 9, I think (yeah, a better comparison might be barbarian 5/prc 3, but I'm doing a quick and dirty comparison, not an iron chef build). A barbarian at that level would probably have around 20 strength or so (not counting magic items), which goes up to 24 while raging. The barbarian and this creature have the same BaB, so this creature would be expected to do more damage than a similarly-build straight barbarian. HP would be about the same while raging, or a win for this creature otherwise. The gray glutton also has better reach and either better speed (with the barbarian having pounce), or the same speed. The barbarian on the other hand has at least twice as many Skill-points, trap sense, uncanny dodge and a single point of DR. I'd say that this creature comes out ahead by a decent margin where combat is concerned.

Comparing this creature with a Tier 3 beatstick, like the warblade, is a lot more tricky because most of the Tier 3 classes get options, which this thing doesn't. However, I think that it gets high enough numbers that a +0 is justified. If all you want to do is play a beat-stick, there's far worse options than this guy among the official classes.

Mike Miller

2019-06-28, 05:39 PM

This is a tough call for me between -0 and +0. I believe I will go with +0 in the end, but it feels close.

Thurbane

2019-06-28, 06:13 PM

OK, I feel like I can rate this one, no psionic powers to judge:

Huge Magical Beast
9 RHD - well, at least they are full BAB with two good saves.
40 ft move - not amazing for a huge creature.
+13 natural AC - not half bad.
Bite 2d8 and 2 claws 2d6 - not bad.
Null psionic exhalation - a poison that inflicts relatively minor power point loss? Not really useful. At least its a free action.
Power resistance 20 - not bad, but a bit underwhelming for your ECL.
Darkvision 60 ft, low-light vision and scent - decent array of senses.
Str +16, Dex -2, Con +8, Int -8, Wis +4, Cha +10: net +28. Very decent, apart from that horrible hit to Int, which hurts all characters.
Small and not great racial skill list. At least Spot and Listen are there, I guess.
Track as a bonus feat - bonus feats are always nice, but no Survival as a racial skill? Meh.
You are basically humanoid in shape and should be able to wield weapons, at least IMHO. No mention as to whether it is capable of speech or not? No languages are listed, but that's to be expected of an animal Int creature. It's a DMs call in regards to language once you raise your Int above 2. I would imagine you are going to have to spend cross class ranks in a language.

Pros: huge in size, respectable natural AC, decent physical stats, and also decent mental stats, aside from Int. Cons: 9 RHD, and a massive hit to Int.

It's borderline, but if you're looking to play a big, dumb melee bruiser, I could see LA +0.

lord_khaine

2019-06-28, 06:16 PM

Comparing this creature with a Tier 3 beatstick, like the warblade, is a lot more tricky because most of the Tier 3 classes get options, which this thing doesn't. However, I think that it gets high enough numbers that a +0 is justified. If all you want to do is play a beat-stick, there's far worse options than this guy among the official classes.

Yeah, and the size+str also means your suddenly a CC monster.
Get a spiked chain, and your 30 foot reach means even large 4-legged things and huge giants can end up tripped.
Or in a grapple.

This thing can actually very quickly turn disruptive for a regular campaign.
Since a lot of encounter types would suddenly no longer be valid.

Caelestion

2019-06-28, 07:10 PM

PR 20 is very reasonable at 9 HD, but it's a shame that it doesn't improve at all. LA +0 seems fine to me.

Celestia

2019-06-28, 07:58 PM

Efrate

2019-06-28, 09:24 PM

I think this has enough to be a +0. It does one thing but it does it better than the closest comparison point. One of the better rhd, its lacking skills but how often do most beatsticks use skills anyways? You have to waste a point during point buy to get 3 int, unless you default to all pcs have minimum 3 int, but 1 point for all the other stats is worth. 2 barbarian levels for trip and pounce then go to town.

Blue Jay

2019-06-28, 11:15 PM

I'm going to vote LA +0 for the grey glutton. Is just a pile of numbers, but it's a pile of really big numbers. In the negative LA thread, I rated triceratops at 7 HD. This guy is really comparable, minus the Trample/Charge bit, but he has full BAB, more weapons with comparable damage values, is eligible for a mouthpick weapon, and can probably wield manufactured weapons without it. So, I'm going with the conservative vote again.

Remuko

2019-06-29, 01:07 AM

I'm going to have to vote -0. It's an ordinary beatstick brute that only gets one, completely useless, gimmick. Not worth 9 RHD. The massive charisma bonus is interesting, but there is virtually no way to use it effectively when you have to spend nearly half your build for it.

This. -0 easily. Even if it can have more hp and dmg than a barbarian, its basically 9 levels in a featureless class light Fighter. Ew.

javcs

2019-06-29, 01:24 AM

Zaq

2019-06-29, 01:30 AM

I'd concur with the conclusion that the not-breath weapon is quite arguably a poison and subject to poison immunities. And while that opens the door to poison-specific options and benefits, it's not good enough to be worth spending even more build resources on it.

I’m struggling to think of what “poison-specific options and benefits” you mean. Especially to something that isn’t an injury poison. I guess there’s that one spell that makes poison saves tougher? Breath of the jungle or something similar?

Seriously though, what poison-specific options do you mean?

unseenmage

2019-06-29, 02:38 AM

Drop my vote on the glutton at -0.
It just isn't gluttonous enough in the right places.

Thurbane

2019-06-29, 03:21 AM

I'm going to have to vote -0. It's an ordinary beatstick brute that only gets one, completely useless, gimmick. Not worth 9 RHD. The massive charisma bonus is interesting, but there is virtually no way to use it effectively when you have to spend nearly half your build for it.

The +10 Cha is meaningless. You lack the class levels and the skills to produce a Charisma based build. And it's not like bruisers (your only viable build option) care about Charisma.

It's not that hard to get Cha bonus to Saves or AC without losing BAB...

But yes, a Cha boost is not ideal on this chassis.

lord_khaine

2019-06-29, 05:20 AM

It's not that hard to get Cha bonus to Saves or AC without losing BAB...

Yeah a dose of paladin and their saves suddenly becomes super viable.

Also think people wastly underestimate what a +8 size bonus to trip/grapple does in a game that hasnt degenerated into a round of magic rocket tag.
Its total bonus there is +16 above what a regular pc should have, give or take a bit.
If your not a tailored encounter then you will end in a headlock or on the ground.
Because this thing could quite easily trip for example.. a hydra.

Or give it mage slayer, and it can suddenly create a 60 diameter zone of denial where anyone trying anything will get screwed.
There are again few non-tailored encounters that can handle that sort of thing.
And when you have a monster that straight up warps the world around it, then i think its wrong to give it less than a positive LA.

Efrate

2019-06-29, 07:56 AM

If its a poison for the breath could it benefit from venomfire? Ideally from an outside source with good cl but xd6 as a free action acid damage every d4 rounds for hours per CL is nice.

Celestia

2019-06-29, 08:03 AM

It's not that hard to get Cha bonus to Saves or AC without losing BAB...

But yes, a Cha boost is not ideal on this chassis.
Spending 11 levels for +5 to saves is far from a good investment.

Caelestion

2019-06-29, 09:16 AM

Why do you assume that people playing this creature will only do it for the +10 Charisma?

Falontani

2019-06-29, 10:42 AM

It's not that hard to get Cha bonus to Saves or AC without losing BAB...

But yes, a Cha boost is not ideal on this chassis.

Barbarian 2 (pounce, whirling frenzy, trip), paladin of Slaughter 2 (cha to saves), blackguard 2 (cha to saves with a different name), witch slayer 5 (mettle and spellcaster shut down)

Thurbane

2019-06-29, 04:18 PM

Why do you assume that people playing this creature will only do it for the +10 Charisma?

Exactly - I wouldn't assume that at all. It's just a small boost that most bruiser type monsters don't get.

If your primary focus is Cha, I don't think this monster would be very high on the list.

Morphic tide

2019-06-30, 01:07 AM

I'll go with +0, because it has pretty wide bonuses that allow the math to work out quite well. Because the extra 16 Strength gives +6 to Attack rolls (due to the -2 Size Modifier) and, assuming a two-handed weapon, +12 damage. And the 13 Natural Armor leaves them ahead on AC by 10 points, though they're behind by 3 on Touch AC. If they're a 3rd level Paladin (to dismiss the binary of Divine Health and Aura of Courage, and excusing the Always alignment), they easily have 24 Lay on Hands points against a 16 Charisma 12th-level Paladin having 36, and are getting 8 per level rather than 3, so this goes far in the Gray Glutton's favor at high enough levels. They also have +8 to saves instead of +3 from Divine Grace. In addition to 9 levels of a strong Reflex save. And, thanks to Constitution, they've got an extra +4 to Fortitude saves in particular and 48 additional raw health, 36 more health overall than the 12th-level Human Paladin when accounting for Lay on Hands.

In exchange for these rather large numerical shortcomings, the Human saves on their mundane armor costs, which are easily outweighed by the Natural Armor bonus and Dexterity penalty to be of more similar cost, and gets an extra feat and two more skill points per level, assuming the score baseline kept a 10 Intelligence instead of dumping it to be left with one more skill point per level on the Human, as well as the choice of bonus feat instead of being stuck with Track, which is far from the worst skill sink. They also have the option of going for Spiked Chain, if they go for 13 Intelligence (getting three skill points per level above the Gray Glutton), but then you're diving into MAD head-first without exception.

And if the comparison point is "who has the best Spiked Chain game?", then Wolf Totem Barbarian 2 gives you Improved Trip, disregarding prerequisites including Combat Expertise, to apply your +16 bonus to. You don't get Lightning Reflexes, but you could have that instead of Improved Trip if you want to control the area over beating things into the ground with Eagle Totem Barbarian, costing you one Opportunity Attack for the improved range and a bonus of +12 (due to lacking +4 from Improved Trip).

You have a better-than-50% chance to trip things that'd require a Natural 20 from a normal race either way. You need to roll a Natural 1 to miss things normal races have a 60% chance to get. And Improved Trip is only relevant for dealing damage, which Spiked Chain Trippers are balls at compared to the spellcasters and Uberchargers, and being punished less for failing the check, which you're vastly more likely to make to the point of reasonable odds on a normal race being near-certainties for you. On top of, again, triple the range for it, and significantly more damage where you do hit things, outside of Charges with Pounce involved.

When it comes to gear? You have all the same options, weapons included. The mundane items cost much more, but again, you have bonuses larger than five-digit expenses on normal characters in multiple areas. In exchange for the severe lack of options and loss of high-level features, you literally have some ability scores normally reserved for fully-geared PCs in your niche as your baseline, allowing you to entirely ignore several basic numbers items in favor of another utility item, if you don't feel like even further increasing your raw brawn advantage. Hell, you can skip out on damage bonuses on your weapon in favor of utility thanks to your size and strength.

If you disagree, offer build comparisons to show it's actually severely behind as a beatstick of various sorts (also correct any numbers or wider rules I got wrong, I do not have a reflexive grasp of 3.5 rules nor a knowledge of the standards. I routinely check the SRD for rules. Also have an abysmal attention span, to the point of occasionally totally forgetting things in the middle of reading them), as its RHD and scores doom it to be. Actually, I'd like to see a "standard" build for the various niches that come up (Spiked Chain tripper, support Paladin, Ubercharger, various low-level casters and so on) so we don't have to have this argument constantly and can make very straightforward build adjustments to compare within the niche at the breakpoint "overhead features online" level.

Dimers

2019-06-30, 03:27 AM

If you disagree, offer build comparisons to show it's actually severely behind as a beatstick of various sorts ...

That's the heart of my reasoning, there. -0 should be assigned to something notably behind a half-elf. Within its role, the grey glutton isn't that. It'd fit fine with a level 9 party that needs a murderbeast. Me personally, I wouldn't enjoy playing one, but going by the numbers ... LA +0.

Falontani

2019-06-30, 12:10 PM

I don't vote very often at all, but this one makes me want to. Comparing to the T4 Fighter/Barbarian/Paladin it is thoroughly a +0. Comparing to the T3 Warblade I come to the conclusion that it is a -0.

so uh +0

MisterKaws

2019-06-30, 12:33 PM

Hey, I'm hopping in on the fun.

Assuming a conservative 16 str 16 dex 10 to the rest, with Power Attack, Combat Reflexes, Shorten Grip and Mage Slayer(assuming you can choose RHD feats) and +2 Str and Dex items for this here. plus a +2 Glaive and a Mithral Chainmail.

The AC ends up at 29. Attack bonus is +19/+14(+17/+12 in short range) for the Glaive(3d8+20), which is very good(Average CR9 AC is 22). You threaten a 20 ft around, which is quite a bit more than a normal character would. Here's a demonstration side by side:

https://i.imgur.com/zBTXupT.png

As you can see, you're thrice as wide as an Antimagic field, and at that level, it's dubious to say casters can hit a Concentration DC of 33-54(which you can force four times per round with Combat Reflexes) at level 9, thus they're basically powerless around that area, unless they've some quickened spells ready. With a dip in Crusader at ECL 10, you get Thicket of Blades, and then they can't even run away. Your movement is also better than most, with a light armor to boot. with 18 Con, your HP at ECL 9 would be 54+36=90, not too shabby.

For me that's a solid +0 as a crowd-controller bruiser, if not a +1.

GreatWyrmGold

2019-06-30, 10:53 PM

The gray glutton prefers to spend its time posing threateningly on the perfectly clean skulls of its dead foes, as 2 int monsters are of course wont to do.
I'm pretty sure that skulls in the D&D world naturally clean themselves and gather into piles. And threatening poses are of course a critical survival strategy in any world where you get free attacks against anyone who moves in an area you threaten.

Instead, Null Psionic Exhalation is a free action, usable every 4 rounds, that spreads poison. Said poison's sole effect is to remove a few power points from its victims, and in a game where the average psion foe will have over seventy power points I doubt 1d4 will make much of an impact. The effect doesn't even count as a breath weapon, so it can't be exploited that way either.
...What's even the point? It's basically a bookkeeping irritation to any psions in the group. It also seems oddly derivative of the iron golem breath weapon...especially since Constitution and power points are hardly equivalent.
If I were a fly on the wall of WotC offices with advisory privileges when this monster was being created, I'd have tried to push for it to disable psionic/magical abilities for 1d4 rounds on a failed save, or something like that. Something that forces the party to react, makes them think about this monster as more than a beatstick with a mildly irritating gimmick.

The most straightforward comparison would be a barbarian 9, I think (yeah, a better comparison might be barbarian 5/prc 3, but I'm doing a quick and dirty comparison, not an iron chef build).
Preach it!

As you can see, you're thrice as wide as an Antimagic field, and at that level, it's dubious to say casters can hit a Concentration DC of 33-54...
So what you're saying is that the real null psionics were the friends polearms we found along the way.

I'm going for +0 on the Grey Glutton. Its basic numbers are almost spot-on when compared to the DMG barbarian (and can we please not bring up the same dang points about what's absent from a monster stat block and/or DMG blurb, I know and I'm using them on the assumption that each would gain similar amounts from half-decent optimization, just in different areas), but while barbarians get class features and easy prestige class opportunities, gluttons get size bonuses and a couple handy little perks (including a high Charisma, which good class selection can leverage).

Bavarian itP

2019-06-30, 11:07 PM

If I were a fly on the wall of WotC offices with advisory privileges when this monster was being created, I'd have tried to push

That's not what a fly on the wall does :smalltongue:

Celestia

2019-07-01, 09:23 AM

I'm pretty sure that skulls in the D&D world naturally clean themselves and gather into piles. And threatening poses are of course a critical survival strategy in any world where you get free attacks against anyone who moves in an area you threaten.
Considering just how many piles of skulls (and only skulls) there appear to be in this world, I propose that they are some form of naturally growing flora that populates monster lairs.

javcs

2019-07-01, 09:55 AM

Considering just how many piles of skulls (and only skulls) there appear to be in this world, I propose that they are some form of naturally growing flora that populates monster lairs.

I think they're more like some kind of non-aquatic coral analogue/relative. Or, rather, the "reef" created by such life forms.

liquidformat

2019-07-01, 10:45 AM

So the two builds I think are most comparable to the Gray Glutton are barbarian 6/Fist of the Forest 2/Bear Warrior 1 and Barbarian 3/Ranger 3/Fist of the Forest 2/Primeval 1. For sake of comparison water orc is the best base race since it like Gray Glutton gives you raw numbers and I normally go with Dire Puma for primal form as it has a good mix of abilities and numbers.

Our Bear warrior ends up with +12 str +6 Dex +6 Con -2 INT -2 WIS -2 CHA +2 NA; full bab, similar hp, almost two good saves with the class mix, pounce, and improved trip if you take lion spirit and wolf totems, track with ability to use it, with con to AC a good dex score and a bit of NA your AC should be similar to Gray Glutton. So over all Saves should be similar between barb and glutton, they should have similar AC, Glutton is slightly ahead for attack and damage since it has +4 str (this could be mitigated by enlarge person though unclear how that interacts with shape changing) as well as the better damage of the glutton natural or manufactured weapons, though IUS + NW of barb does a lot to balance this out. Hands down the barbarian will have more skill points and more to do out of combat, he could also trade improved trip and track for trap destroyer and be much more useful out of combat. Also it is important to point out Glutton must be level 11 before he can get improved trip due to how dumb they are. Also being huge all the time can and will be an issue in a world designed for medium and small characters, just trying to adventure in some dungeons will be a major issue. Over all I think the Glutton comes out similarly or slightly below the bear warrior which is a solid tier 4 build.

Onto the primeval, quick note this build requires bear totem to meet feat requirements in this number of levels, and optimally going barb 3/ranger 5/FotF 2/primeval is a better to take advantage of wild shape ranger. Anyways moving on, +18 str, +10 dex, +14 Con, +4 NA, pounce, improved grab, rake, 50' speed (60' with wild shape ranger), 20' climb, FA arcane caster gets a special shout out here, track. Over all again saves should be similar between primeval's better ability scores and the fact that steadfast determination is all but met, AC is hands down better for the primeval, between natural attack routine and IUS primeval has a better damage output, more skill points, uses outside combat. If we progress both to level 11, assuming glutton takes 2 levels of barb, primeval either has other movement modes and more uses of primal form via wild shape ranger or enhances his ability scores via primeval either way is still ahead of the glutton. the Primal build is probably still tier 4 but probably the top of it if not a low tier 3. Either way the Glutton is worse across the board. Also note that the Glutton is stuck mostly dipping base classes since it will be hard for it to come up with the skill points to enter most prcs, for example the barbarian2/paladin of slaughter2/blackguard 2/witch slayer you are looking at 18 skill point which will most likely be 18 levels needed to make that build since hide is cross class.

Altogether, since our balance point is Tier 3 and not tier 4 the glutton looks like a -0 LA, sure he is close to +0 but he doesn't make the cut.

Caelestion

2019-07-01, 11:45 AM

Why does the ridiculous water orc keep getting trawled out as if it's some paragon of balance? It's also about as representative of "base races" as an Asian person is in Cwmbran.

ExLibrisMortis

2019-07-01, 12:01 PM

Why does the ridiculous water orc keep getting trawled out as if it's some paragon of balance? It's also about as representative of "base races" as an Asian person is in Cwmbran.
Because it's so damn hard to quantify the value of a bonus feat and a point of essentia, that's why :smalltongue:.

Grey gluttons are too much of a pile of numbers to give them anything but -0.

MisterKaws

2019-07-01, 12:04 PM

Why does the ridiculous water orc keep getting trawled out as if it's some paragon of balance? It's also about as representative of "base races" as an Asian person is in Cwmbran.

People who use these LA revisions are probably already pretty familiar with the system, so we might as well assume they're at least mid-high-OP groups.

Celestia

2019-07-01, 12:09 PM

I think they're more like some kind of non-aquatic coral analogue/relative. Or, rather, the "reef" created by such life forms.
Ah, that makes sense. Yes, I can see that.

Why does the ridiculous water orc keep getting trawled out as if it's some paragon of balance? It's also about as representative of "base races" as an Asian person is in Cwmbran.
I keep thinking the same thing when people compare these monsters to single class fighters and barbarians.

liquidformat

2019-07-01, 12:11 PM

Why does the ridiculous water orc keep getting trawled out as if it's some paragon of balance? It's also about as representative of "base races" as an Asian person is in Cwmbran.

Honestly, I don't see what people have against it especially inside this forum specifically where the focus is to figure out LA. For starters it is a base race as it has net zero ability score total, sure it might be a high +0 but we also agree that something like human, warforged, or whisper gnome are also high +0. Also, I have yet to hear anyone even attempt to argue it is not a +0 race since it clearly isn't good enough for a +1, in fact for most builds besides pure beatsticks it is in fact a pretty horrible choice. But, it is a reasonable base race to compare to beat sticks as it follows the beat stick formula having high physical ability scores and low mental ones and little else. Also lets face it we are in homebrew and optimization land if you are even thinking about adjusting monster LAs, saying something like we should be comparing to core only is an unreasonable expectation inside this thread. Anyone using this thread is going to probably also be allowing most if not all primary source books.

I use it for these reasons, water orc with barbarian class levels, a dip in other classes, and possibly a prc or two gives you a good idea of what is possible for ability scores and potential features at any level.

What would you propose should be the correct base race choice to contrast beatsticks? I know lord_khaine likes to compare everything with human which even he admits is hard to compare since quantifying the bonus feat is a huge curve.

GreatWyrmGold

2019-07-01, 02:21 PM

That's not what a fly on the wall does :smalltongue:
Then why did they give the fly advisory privileges?

I think they're more like some kind of non-aquatic coral analogue/relative. Or, rather, the "reef" created by such life forms.
I'd like to see someone at WotC explain why a fantasy land-coral would have skull-shaped polyps. Maybe it feeds off the aura of death and despair that accompanies necromancers and tricks them into investigating the area?

I keep thinking the same thing when people compare these monsters to single class fighters and barbarians.
When I do it, it's on the assumption that you can pimp out a martial build from a single-class base roughly as well as you can a monster. The chassis will be similar, but you'll have better class abilities on one hand and better everything else on the other.
Also, I don't want to invent two whole builds every time I want to see how well a monster compares to a martial character.

Morphic tide

2019-07-01, 02:29 PM

javcs

2019-07-01, 03:34 PM

I'd like to see someone at WotC explain why a fantasy land-coral would have skull-shaped polyps. Maybe it feeds off the aura of death and despair that accompanies necromancers and tricks them into investigating the area?

It's possible they were originally some sort of engineered life form that got out into the wild.
More specifically, a life form originally engineered for decorative purposes.

Like, maybe they were engineered to add ambience or whatever for some sort of intelligent monster's lair. And the designer went with a life form, rather than sculptures because the life form would have better/cheaper self maintenance and repair capabilities than using enchantments on statuary.

They might have other quality of life type features/abilities too.

I'd say that it's possible that at least one variety would feed on/absorb ambient necromantic energies - after all, if they're commonly found on monster lairs, especially lairs of monsters that eat people/intelligent beings, those are places that would theoretically tend to produce more spontaneous undead because of how the people who get eaten died and their associated trauma. But this stuff (usually) eats the ambient necromantic energies such that spontaneous undead outbreaks from the people who get eaten are prevented, or otherwise significantly impeded.

Blue Jay

2019-07-01, 03:54 PM

Then maybe we should have standard builds for these comparisons worked out ahead of time, so we can compare each monster to an established baseline build for its role and how it compares after frontloaded feature stubs. Standardize the crap out of the comparisons.

We've already had this debate, like, seven or eight times now. We voted on it, and the majority wanted us to compare monsters to the closest equivalent tier-3 or higher class with middling optimization. There's no point in continuing to argue about what the appropriate point of reference is, because it's been argued to death already, and there's no such thing as an objective "right" answer.

Frankly, I'm starting to feel like it doesn't matter what our exact reference point is, as long as it's something that's roughly functionally equivalent to the monster being rated. I'm also wondering whether we'd be better off not standardizing our point of reference. The ideal scenario would see us getting votes from the high-op, low-op and mid-op perspectives, and the appropriate LA would represent some kind of balance of those perspectives. I'm not sure that asking voters to vote from a perspective other than their own personal experience is the way to improve the reliability of the vote's outcome.

I say just vote your frickin' conscience and move on.

Caelestion

2019-07-01, 03:54 PM

For starters it is a base race as it has net zero ability score total, sure it might be a high +0 but we also agree that something like human, warforged, or whisper gnome are also high +0.

Your only definition for a base race is one with +0 ability modifiers and 0 LA? By that definition, the PHB half-orc isn't a base race and neither is the water halfling, literally right above the water orc in Unearthed Arcana.

GreatWyrmGold

2019-07-01, 04:00 PM

Why are we still comparing the raw monster with no class levels to double-PRCs with limited-use abilities up?
Because double-PRC characters are just what some people associate with "barely-optimized character," hence their baseline for balance. There are other problems with the argument, but I can explain that part.

...If you can come up with a very straightforward build, like using your mental ability bonuses (Gray Gluttons have significant bonuses to both Wisdom and Charisma, only Intelligence is bad)...
Yeah, you don't need to take cross-class ranks in Knowledge (architecture and engineering) to use your mind in combat.

Then maybe we should have standard builds for these comparisons worked out ahead of time, so we can compare each monster to an established baseline build for its role and how it compares after frontloaded feature stubs. Standardize the crap out of the comparisons.
If someone wants to make 'em, I'm all ears.

It's possible they were originally some sort of engineered life form that got out into the wild.
More specifically, a life form originally engineered for decorative purposes.

Like, maybe they were engineered to add ambience or whatever for some sort of intelligent monster's lair. And the designer went with a life form, rather than sculptures because the life form would have better/cheaper self maintenance and repair capabilities than using enchantments on statuary.

They might have other quality of life type features/abilities too.

I'd say that it's possible that at least one variety would feed on/absorb ambient necromantic energies - after all, if they're commonly found on monster lairs, especially lairs of monsters that eat people/intelligent beings, those are places that would theoretically tend to produce more spontaneous undead because of how the people who get eaten died and their associated trauma. But this stuff (usually) eats the ambient necromantic energies such that spontaneous undead outbreaks from the people who get eaten are prevented, or otherwise significantly impeded.
I like the idea of combining the two. Say, a necromancer invented them to stop his raw material from spontaneously animating before he could use it. Now it grows wild, thriving in places where the necrotic energy stinks even to mortal noses. Of course, destroying the "skulls" would at the very least stop it from being absorbed and might even release some of it...

liquidformat

2019-07-01, 04:05 PM

Why are we still comparing the raw monster with no class levels to double-PRCs with limited-use abilities up? A Gray Glutton can take Bear Warrior or Fist of the Forest as its second class level. Two levels Barbarian, one level Bear Warrior and two levels Fist of the Forest gives the same Improved Uncanny Dodge, the same limited-use damage bonuses, most of the same goodies, and if you're really pushing it, you can take one level of Barbarian, one of Bear Warrior and one of Fist of the Forrest for that same single-fight nova in three class levels. And for the rest of the day, you're pretty damn close to par.

If the LA becomes invalid after three class levels, it shouldn't be that LA. If you can come up with a very straightforward build, like using your mental ability bonuses (Gray Gluttons have significant bonuses to both Wisdom and Charisma, only Intelligence is bad), that wildly overshadows standard races in that actually-noteworthy niche, then maybe we should think about LA being positive. Your racial ability scores are always on. That Barbarian only has Feral Trance for one fight, and only gets Bear Form for two. Stacking them means that an expected four-fight adventuring day has one fight without Feral Trance and two fights with nothing, unless the confusingly-worded Bear Form gives you an extra Bear Form use independent of Rage. If it's inclusive, you have one non-Bear Form rage, one Bear Form and one Feral Trance with your comparison point Barbarian, so burning them all on one fight to have the +12 Strength, which is still four behind the Gray Glutton and the AC is still wildly behind, means the other three expected fights per adventuring day leave you with just one Rage between them all.

Actually run the numbers for dips, because we're talking about PCs. They get to have class levels the moment they level up for the first time. If the LA completely breaks after three levels, then it needs to be judged according to those three levels, and for the Gray Glutton, it can get +8 Strength, +2 Dexterity and +4 Constitution for one fight per day in two levels and the all-important 2nd-level Totem feature, which can be Improved Trip to leverage Spiked Chain shenanigans (because they have hands, they can use weapons, they're not locked to Natural Attacks), with the third. By the time they have that same one-fight nova with Barb 1/Bear Warrior 1/FotF 1, the regular Barbarian hasn't gotten Black Bear Form, and when they do, the Gray Glutton can have Improved Uncanny Dodge from FotF 2.

Then maybe we should have standard builds for these comparisons worked out ahead of time, so we can compare each monster to an established baseline build for its role and how it compares after frontloaded feature stubs. Standardize the crap out of the comparisons.

It is an unreasonable argument to say the comparison point should be a single classed barbarian, one because that isn't tier 3 and two because who actually does that? The way to power for mundanes is dipping that is a fact of the game that all your arguing won't overcome, and it is reasonable to expect at least one prc when comparing a monster with this many rhd. To say otherwise is disingenuous, it is the same reason to use a water orc over a human.

Second please do some math, at level 9 the glutton has a wopping 10 skill points, so if you put skill points into the cross class skills to get FotF you have one at 4 and the other at 1, still needing 3 levels of classes with said skills to enter or 8 class levels if you waited until you get class levels. I believe Bear Warrior was errata'ed to be equal to # of rages, so extra rage can bring you up to the four encounters/day (I have never been in a game that has had over two a day so depends on peoples experience/dms they game with). Though not Raw I haven't had an issue with using extra rage to get more feral trance and you can also take another level there. Displaying Raging, bear form, and Feral trance is reasonable as most people will design their character to typically be in said form for the 1-4 fights/day they participate

So earliest you could take FotF is level 12 at which the bear warrior would have brown bear bring him up to +20 str +6 Dex +10 Con -2 INT -2 WIS -2 CHA, +5 NA; whereas the glutton would be Str +24, Dex +4, Con +12, +2 NA in bear rage form. Note that taking bear form actually makes the glutton's AC worse, worse damage potential, and screws you over for the main benefit of being the glutton which is tripping. Going Frenzied Berserker would actually be a better choice if not for the fact that the earliest you could take it is 16 without retraining. All and all I think bear warrior makes Glutton worse in all ways except sheer numbers, and the sheer numbers it gives in comparison aren't that much better. He is better off going barb 2/paladin of slaughter 2/battle dancer 1/FotF 1-3/witch slayer3-5 (I have yet to meet a dm that would let me stack cha to saves from paladin+blackguard) and again you are going to have a heck of a time with getting the skills to get that to work...

You are really left dumpster diving base classes and looking for prcs that have little to no skill reqs to make the glutton work since that -8 int is quite nasty. It doesn't help that its PR doesn't scale and its one ability can be ignored almost completely.

javcs

2019-07-01, 04:44 PM

Because double-PRC characters are just what some people associate with "barely-optimized character," hence their baseline for balance. There are other problems with the argument, but I can explain that part.

It's probably also a fair argument that any DM signing off on players using this thread could reasonably be expected to have a pretty solid grasp on things. Likewise, it's probably fair to expect that the players know what they're doing too.
At least to the point of being able to use the internet and find various class guides/handbooks. And let's be honest, most class guides/handbooks have dip and PRC ratings and recommendations, and most classes and builds can be significantly improved upon by moving beyond just the one base class. Pretty much the only class that is complicated to outright upgrade via multiclassing/dipping/PRCs instead of just sidegrading is the druid. And it's not like straight druid is in need of help ... nor are there that many monsters that compare to a druid.

If someone wants to make 'em, I'm all ears.

I don't think that there is a way to make good one-size fits all comparison builds. At least for physical combatants and their various roles. There's just too many possible variations to be practical. Could maybe do some one size fits all builds for the caster types, but we don't really need something like that for them.

I like the idea of combining the two. Say, a necromancer invented them to stop his raw material from spontaneously animating before he could use it. Now it grows wild, thriving in places where the necrotic energy stinks even to mortal noses. Of course, destroying the "skulls" would at the very least stop it from being absorbed and might even release some of it...
Nobody wants spontaneous undead outbreaks in their homes/base/lair.
Especially not if there are undead spirits being spontaneously formed from people you made dead in the first place.

Of course, while breaking the "skulls" might unleash a surprise horde of undead against the owner of the lair, possibly enough to kill them, it's worse likely that they won't be any happier about the adventurers who showed up too late to save them, assuming that they're still rational enough to recognize that the adventurers aren't working with the cause of their demise.

Might even be laws protecting the stuff - or at least, the more benign varieties, because while they're creepy looking (and have a dubious origin), they're way better than the alternative as far as society is concerned, being that spontaneous undead outbreaks are bad for pretty much everybody.

Inevitability

2019-07-01, 04:51 PM

Graaaaaay renders:

-0: 8 votes
+0: 11 votes
+1: 1 vote (no points for guessing who)

The rating of +0 will be maintained in light of those results.

Considering just how many piles of skulls (and only skulls) there appear to be in this world, I propose that they are some form of naturally growing flora that populates monster lairs.

Can I quote this?

Inevitability

2019-07-01, 04:57 PM

Half-Giant

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/xph_gallery/80496.jpg

Weirdly proportioned psionic humanoids, unsubtly imported from Dark Sun.

The obvious balance point here are goliaths (rated at +1, unlikely to change), and I gotta say that they compare quite well. Both are medium-sized, both get Powerful Build, both get +2 constitution and -2 dexterity in addition to a strength bonus (+4 for the goliath, +2 for the half-giant).

The few differences are quite minor. In addition to the strength bonus, half-giants get +2 on saving throws against fire/heat effects, two bonus power points, and Stomp 1/day. Goliaths, meanwhile, get +2 sense motive, tolerance of high altitudes, and bonuses when climbing and jumping. Half-giants have a minor niche in getting the giant type, which opens up Return To Nature shenanigans, but those are so niche that I'm comfortable dismissing them as a viable build.

All things considered, the half giant is a goliath that sacrifices some brute strength for psionic utility, and that's a fair choice. +1 LA for those guys.

liquidformat

2019-07-01, 04:57 PM

Your only definition for a base race is one with +0 ability modifiers and 0 LA? By that definition, the PHB half-orc isn't a base race and neither is the water halfling, literally right above the water orc in Unearthed Arcana.

This seems like pretty decent a quivocation fallacy...

MisterKaws

2019-07-01, 05:17 PM

Half-Giant

This one is pretty obvious, I guess. Not the strongest +1 ever but definitely in the +1 range.

Thurbane

2019-07-01, 05:23 PM

Without going in to too much details, I concur with LA +1.

Celestia

2019-07-01, 05:33 PM

Graaaaaay renders:

-0: 8 votes
+0: 11 votes
+1: 1 vote (no points for guessing who)

The rating of +0 will be maintained in light of those results.

Can I quote this?
Sure. more text

javcs

2019-07-01, 05:57 PM

Concur with the +1 for the Half Giant. It's nearer the bottom of +1, though.

ViperMagnum357

2019-07-01, 06:31 PM

LA +1 on the Half-Giant. Not spectacular, but having Powerful Build and net +2 abilities with no serious drawbacks is enough to edge it upwards.

Caelestion

2019-07-01, 06:37 PM

The half-giant isn't a particularly blatant +1, but I think it is LA +1.

This seems like pretty decent a quivocation fallacy...

Feel free to explain why I'm wrong. You laid out a pretty clear specification for a base race in your eyes, so unless you have other rules you didn't mention, I can only conclude that you don't like the obvious inconsistencies with using that specification.

liquidformat

2019-07-01, 06:37 PM

Not the best +1 but too good for +0 so +1 it is.

Efrate

2019-07-01, 06:52 PM

Giant type is nice, means hold person and the like will not hit you. Its a reasonable +1.

No brains

2019-07-01, 08:44 PM

I'm kinda curious what exactly puts these at +1 over a good +0. Is it the combo of giant type and powerful build? What could be taken away to make this a +0?

MisterKaws

2019-07-01, 09:09 PM

I'm kinda curious what exactly puts these at +1 over a good +0. Is it the combo of giant type and powerful build? What could be taken away to make this a +0?

Powerful Build and Giant Type. Without those two it's just a slightly better psionic Orc.

javcs

2019-07-01, 09:10 PM

I'm kinda curious what exactly puts these at +1 over a good +0. Is it the combo of giant type and powerful build? What could be taken away to make this a +0?

Giant type, powerful build, net positive stats, the bonus to saves against fire spells and effects (aka, most common energy type), and the power points unlocking access to psionic feats.

That said, IMO the Half Giant is at the bottom end of +1. Take any one of the above away, and it probably drops to the top of +0, take any two away and it's definitely +0, though probably still on the stronger end.

Thurbane

2019-07-01, 09:35 PM

The other nice thing about Giant type is the Primordial Giant LA +0 template.

There's also a way to (ab)use Return To Nature to become extremely small, if that works for your build.

Falontani

2019-07-01, 10:11 PM

The other nice thing about Giant type is the Primordial Giant LA +0 template.

There's also a way to (ab)use Return To Nature to become extremely small, if that works for your build.

Waiting to see what half troll's new LA is so I can see if I can do exactly that with a few builds

liquidformat

2019-07-01, 10:54 PM

Feel free to explain why I'm wrong. You laid out a pretty clear specification for a base race in your eyes, so unless you have other rules you didn't mention, I can only conclude that you don't like the obvious inconsistencies with using that specification.

So now that you have been called out for a quivocation fallacy you go for an appeal to ignorance to top it off, great job buddy you are on the right road. First off you only took one sentence out of an entire paragraph, later on I also said that besides numbers they get little else and besides specifically going with a beat stick which are normally tier 4 and lower (with exception of ToB which brings them up to tier 3) the water orc is a horrible choice for most classes. Sure we could argue that swim speed is important but it either is important or it is useless and that is about all the water orc gets. Just having numbers is the reason why we have given things like a gnoll a -0 LA and in this case it makes the water orc better than a general orc and even given certain builds it makes it a higher base race but it isn't enough to go to +1. No one would ever touch a water orc at +1. Now that I think about it your last statement and this one are also a decent example of hasty generalizations, I have told you why I believe a specific race gets a certain rating so you assume that is my single criteria for all judgments.

Lastly it was decided in one of the first LA-assignment thread that water orc was a +0 base race and a good comparison point, so this isn't exactly a new argument nor isn't a worth while one anytime someone uses a water orc. I tried to be polite with you and ask what you thought was a good base race for comparison and give some insight on why I thought a specific base race we have already established as a +0 base race is a good choice, but I guess that was a waste of time...

Zaq

2019-07-02, 01:10 AM

Dimers

2019-07-02, 03:49 AM

Caelestion

2019-07-02, 04:55 AM

So now that you have been called out for a quivocation fallacy you go for an appeal to ignorance to top it off, great job buddy you are on the right road.

For someone who is throwing around fallacies as if it makes you sound smart, you should check up on how they're actually spelt. It's an equivocation fallacy. Just thought I'd let you know.

liquidformat

2019-07-02, 08:43 AM

For someone who is throwing around fallacies as if it makes you sound smart, you should check up on how they're actually spelt. It's an equivocation fallacy. Just thought I'd let you know.

Thank you for correcting a spelling error.

Celestia

2019-07-02, 09:16 AM

liquidformat

2019-07-02, 09:40 AM

I'm surprised to see my rating below most people's for a change. LA +0 for me; Powerful Build is nice but not worth a class level, No. Let me rephrase that. Unless you're stacking at least a couple size increases on an already big honkin' weapon, Powerful Build is about 1 or 2 damage difference. The only thing that makes it notable in play is the grapple/trip/swallow/etc benefit. And in the early game (when LA is a bigger percentage of your build), giant type is as likely to be a problem as a bonus. Players control a lot of action, and I bet enlarge person comes up more often on Team PC than charm person or hold person does on Team Antagonist.

This assumes you will be taking half-giant and not going psionic, I don't think I have been in a game with a half-giant that didn't take at least one level of Psychic Warrior and all of those games were Psionic focused so not being subject to enlarge, charm, and hold person was moot. But with that said I agree even in a psionic focused game I would always go with goliath over half-giant, goliath is just better.

OgresAreCute

2019-07-02, 09:45 AM

Powerful Build is nice mostly for the +4 to combat maneuvers and is a genuinely good ability, but with the mediocre stat mods and lackluster other abilities I don't like this at +1. With buy-off I think they're fine at +1, but since this thread doesn't use buy-off I'm gonna have to vote +0.

Morphic tide

2019-07-02, 11:07 AM

The detriments of being a Giant are immensely reduced by the fact of Half-Giant being a Psionic race, and therefor having access to the Psionic mechanics for such effects, guaranteeing access to the Humanoid-only spell effects that have non-type-specific Psionic equivalents. Expansion, for instance, is PsyWar 1, which is a natural class for the extra-PP-and-Strength-bonus Half-Giant. Sure, you likely don't want the Claw powers, but almost all of them have weapon counterparts anyways for you to get up to +4.5 for with Powerful Build.

In particular, it makes 1d10 into 2d8, 1d8 into 2d6 and 2d6 and 1d12 into 3d6. You'll be able to have Expansion active near enough all-fight every fight as a weapon-using Psychic Warrior (and Half-Giant gives an extra two uses of it a day immediately), so this first step is a safe assumption. After this, you're adding d6 and d8 each size increase, so any of the 1d10 weapons are getting +4.5 damage on average, which includes the Bastard Sword and Glaive. The ones that become d6s are getting +3.5 damage per size increase, which includes the Greatsword's baseline 2d6.

So there's actually a lot of useful weapons that are getting an extra +3.5 damage, and a few getting +4.5, for an Expansion-spamming Psychic Warrior. You also presumably get the Large progression for Claws of the Beast, which starts as just +1 average damage, but at 5 PP spent, it increases to +2.5 and the advantage becomes +3.5 afterwards. Bite of the Wolf immediately has the 3.5 average damage advantage, being 2d6 instead of 1d6, while applying Expansion reduces the advantage to 2 average damage. The damage of higher-level Bite of the Wolf is not increased in this way.

Overall, I think the bonuses are enough that outright LA+1 wouldn't invalidate the character, though it would be increasingly painful for Manifesting as level increases, this is offset in the natural Psychic Warrior path by the virtual size bonus conserving some PP and the two extra PP.

GreatWyrmGold

2019-07-02, 11:12 AM

It is an unreasonable argument to say the comparison point should be a single classed barbarian, one because that isn't tier 3 and two because who actually does that?
Let's ignore the optimizer snootiness and move on.
When comparing the single-classed barbarian to the straight stat block, "who actually does that?" applies to both sides of the equation. If you want to build a "proper" melee PC to compare a monster to, you also need to rebuild the monster as a PC.

Nobody wants spontaneous undead outbreaks in their homes/base/lair.
Especially not if there are undead spirits being spontaneously formed from people you made dead in the first place.
Of course, while breaking the "skulls" might unleash a surprise horde of undead against the owner of the lair, possibly enough to kill them, it's worse likely that they won't be any happier about the adventurers who showed up too late to save them, assuming that they're still rational enough to recognize that the adventurers aren't working with the cause of their demise.
Might even be laws protecting the stuff - or at least, the more benign varieties, because while they're creepy looking (and have a dubious origin), they're way better than the alternative as far as society is concerned, being that spontaneous undead outbreaks are bad for pretty much everybody.
Though there are probably some necromantic rituals that let you grab (most) of the power released when you harvest the skulls, serving as an alternative to nightshade potions or human sacrifice as a power source for other rituals. And let's face it, a typical D&D world has no shortage of maniacs who'd eagerly unleash a plague of undead on the land on the assumption that they could be controlled and used to Rule the World or whatever.

liquidformat

2019-07-02, 11:40 AM

Let's ignore the optimizer snootiness and move on.
When comparing the single-classed barbarian to the straight stat block, "who actually does that?" applies to both sides of the equation. If you want to build a "proper" melee PC to compare a monster to, you also need to rebuild the monster as a PC.

Optimizer snootiness? OK I will bite, so tell me when was the last time you played through barbarian 20?

I am not sure what you mean by 'rebuild' the monster as a PC, if you mean figure out where it would go and what classes it would take and so forth we already do that.

If you mean remake the monster from the ground up that is an unreasonable demand and completely outside the scope of this thread. We are here to figure out what a reasonable LA is for each monster and part of that is comparing them to what could potentially be done at a level equal to their rhd, and progressed further towards 20 with a goal of tier ~3 as comparison. Part of that is what could said base class pc do instead of those rhd. To now more the bar to 'well its not fair to do that because those rhd are fix' is a ridiculous expectation and defeats the entire purpose of this thread.

Remuko

2019-07-02, 12:31 PM

A familiar refrain: I would never take the half-giant at +1 unless doing shenanigans with the Giant type. It is not worth losing (all together now!) BAB, HP, saves, skill ranks, and class advancement. That is an enormous cost without a lot of game-changing benefit.

I think that the half-giant is a victim of WotC’s laughable STR-phobia, and the whole stupid “OMG big weaponz!” thing triggered some dev’s itchy LA finger. (Even on a beatstick, think about how many size increases you have to stack before +1 weapon size is a better return on damage than an extra BAB to throw into Power Attack.) The cost is not worth the benefit. I don’t care if it’s more powerful than a standard elf; it’s not more powerful than (or even equal in power to) a standard class level, and therefore it’s overpriced at +1.

I could maybe be talked into +1 with buyoff, but not without buyoff. I’d rather take a half-elf and an extra class level than be a half-giant.

I'm surprised to see my rating below most people's for a change. LA +0 for me; Powerful Build is nice but not worth a class level, No. Let me rephrase that. Unless you're stacking at least a couple size increases on an already big honkin' weapon, Powerful Build is about 1 or 2 damage difference. The only thing that makes it notable in play is the grapple/trip/swallow/etc benefit. And in the early game (when LA is a bigger percentage of your build), giant type is as likely to be a problem as a bonus. Players control a lot of action, and I bet enlarge person comes up more often on Team PC than charm person or hold person does on Team Antagonist.

Dimers speaks the truth.

Powerful Build is nice mostly for the +4 to combat maneuvers and is a genuinely good ability, but with the mediocre stat mods and lackluster other abilities I don't like this at +1. With buy-off I think they're fine at +1, but since this thread doesn't use buy-off I'm gonna have to vote +0.

Have to concur with all these folks. +0

Luccan

2019-07-02, 12:50 PM

ExLibrisMortis

2019-07-02, 01:30 PM

I think +1 is fair. You can easily make up for the "lost" level if you take advantage of the afininty for psionics (instead of not doing that for no good reason), while still coming out ahead in enough areas that I think it would be worth it. I do agree with whoever said removing one or two things would make it a +0 race, so it isn't the strongest example, but it's definitely too good for no adjustment, IMO.
I think you're contradicting yourself slightly, here. "You can easily make up for the lost level" and "removing one thing makes it a +0 race"? I don't think I can easily make up for a whole class level if the difference with a strong LA +0, like a human, is only +2 Strength, or Powerful Build, or +2 power points. For one, there are class levels that will give me 2 pp and a feat, power list, skill points, saves, and so on.

Half-giants have very limited affinity for psionics. In fact, all races that have fixed bonus pp only really benefit at level 1-3 and in builds that only use psionic focus (e.g. Deep Impact, Speed of Thought, etcetera). It's like getting a bonus first-level slot if you take a level in spellcaster. It's great at low levels, but long-term, it's far, far worse than +2 to your casting stat, and nothing like "making up for a lost level".

For me, the tricky part of rating the half-giant is the Primordial template, which is really good when applied to half-giants, but probably not that good when applied to any other giant (because what it's good for--casting--doesn't really mesh with stacks of giant RHD). Primordial half-giants might deserve LA +1, even though the individual elements do not, and that's hard to account for (LA +0.5 is good for this pairing, I suppose, but not all halves synergize well).

Overall, I'll vote LA +0.

Morphic tide

2019-07-02, 02:31 PM

Optimizer snootiness? OK I will bite, so tell me when was the last time you played through barbarian 20?

I am not sure what you mean by 'rebuild' the monster as a PC, if you mean figure out where it would go and what classes it would take and so forth we already do that.

If you mean remake the monster from the ground up that is an unreasonable demand and completely outside the scope of this thread. We are here to figure out what a reasonable LA is for each monster and part of that is comparing them to what could potentially be done at a level equal to their rhd, and progressed further towards 20 with a goal of tier ~3 as comparison. Part of that is what could said base class pc do instead of those rhd. To now more the bar to 'well its not fair to do that because those rhd are fix' is a ridiculous expectation and defeats the entire purpose of this thread.

Redo the non-bonus feats, then give three PC levels and compare a standard-race PC of that number of hit dice. Allow for the typical frontloaded features responsible for most PCs working, simple as that.

This is why I want to see a standardized build to compare to for each general niche. One Ubercharger, one Spiked Chain shenanigans-build, one for skillmonkies, generally have a relatively straightforward comparison for each archetype that a monster can be reliably compared to. And make a couple more each time we cover a new sourcebook that has PC options of importance, as would be the case with this recent round of judgements on Psionics-associated creatures often having comparison to Psychic Warrior or Wilder. It doesn't need to be optimized, it just needs to be a clear and public comparison.

As for those saying Half Giant is LA +0: You're saying that +8.5 "naked" DPR is perfectly fine at level two, rising to +20.5 at 5th level. Because that's what Powerful Build and +2 Strength automatically gets you out of a Natural Attack Psychic Warrior (+2 out of being Large with Claws of the Beast, which increases to +7 at ML 5 when fully augmented, +3.5 out of Bite of the Wolf, which doesn't scale with size, and +3 for +2 Strength and three attacks). Unless there's some spectacularly powerful pair of feats to get Humans caught up on this, as any single feat can still be taken by the Half-Giant. At level one, it's still +4.5 if you get Bite of the Wolf and +4 if you get Claws of the Beast.

LA +1 hurts massively at the earliest and latest levels, but for levels 5-15, it's going to be well in line, especially if you're trading out your bonuses for endurance. One PP per fight for not using Expansion isn't much, but it saves you that Power Known entirely and it does a lot at the earliest levels, and you can save two to four PP by declining a layer of augment on Claws of the Beast to stick to the same damage as a Medium non-Powerful Build Psychic Warrior. Each fight, which adds up. At higher levels, you're saving six PP per fight as a Psychic Warrior just from not needing to augment Expansion to be effectively Huge. And you can delay having Expansion at all until level 7 allows the standard race to augment to Huge, giving you a lot of other very important Powers, like Hustle letting you move and full attack on the same round, a level sooner from the Psychic Warrior keeping up with your damage through Expansion. And you aren't spending the PP you'd be spending to keep up as a standard race, freeing you to have extra Body Adjustment uses or whatever.

There's very much ways to make up for being LA +1 as a Half-Giant Psychic Warrior, and they form rather significant advantages without the LA.

Prime32

2019-07-02, 02:44 PM

For me, the tricky part of rating the half-giant is the Primordial template, which is really good when applied to half-giants, but probably not that good when applied to any other giant (because what it's good for--casting--doesn't really mesh with stacks of giant RHD). Primordial half-giants might deserve LA +1, even though the individual elements do not, and that's hard to account for (LA +0.5 is good for this pairing, I suppose, but not all halves synergize well).There's also eneko from Secrets of Sarlona, though they're mostly just worse half-giants with longbow proficiency and some utility SLAs.

lord_khaine

2019-07-02, 02:56 PM

On the subject of ½ giant LA.
Im not entirely certain where i stand.
But from what i can read, powerful build does not affect Claws of the beast.
Since your actual size does not change.
You just count as a size larger of a list of situations that does not include this one.

GreatWyrmGold

2019-07-02, 03:19 PM

The other nice thing about Giant type is the Primordial Giant LA +0 template.

There's also a way to (ab)use Return To Nature to become extremely small, if that works for your build.
Permanent stackable size decreases are nice on a psionic character. A decent SLA at will (invisibility or levitate, or maybe invisibility purge) is nice on any character. I'd say the

So now that you have been called out for a quivocation fallacy you go for an appeal to ignorance to top it off, great job buddy you are on the right road.
Righter than yours. Cool it with the condescension. He effed up, yes, but so have you, and not just tonally. Don't act like you're some paragon of reason deigning to share your wisdom with the idiots of the internet.

I think that the half-giant is a victim of WotC’s laughable STR-phobia, and the whole stupid “OMG big weaponz!” thing triggered some dev’s itchy LA finger.
It's hilariously easy to string together a bunch of 3.5's design paradigm into a narrative about the coastal wizards being terrified that the mundane fighters and rogues of the world might be getting too much power.

After this, you're adding d6 and d8 each size increase, so any of the 1d10 weapons are getting +4.5 damage on average, which includes the Bastard Sword and Glaive. The ones that become d6s are getting +3.5 damage per size increase, which includes the Greatsword's baseline 2d6.
IIRC, it goes 2d6->2d8->3d6->3d8, not 2d6->3d6 and 2d8->3d8.

Optimizer snootiness? OK I will bite, so tell me when was the last time you played through barbarian 20?
Dumb question. When was the last time you played a 20-level-long game?
Believe it or not, a lot of players don't bother with prestige classes and dips and stuff. Most of the time, I'm perfectly happy just single-classing my way through however many levels a game lasts for. I need a specific reason to multiclass, and "It lets you do the same thing but better" isn't enough (unless I currently suck at the game I'm in).

I am not sure what you mean by 'rebuild' the monster as a PC, if you mean figure out where it would go and what classes it would take and so forth we already do that.
I mean that, if you're comparing stat blocks to stat blocks and want to use a "properly" optimized human beatstick on the one end, you would need to build the monster side as a character as well. Point-buy ability scores, good feats, equipment, the whole shebang. A gray glutton built this way has as much resemblance to the one in the book as your barbarian chowder has to a straight barb20.
If you're just asserting "This monster's combat prowess is better/worse than an equivalent barbarian chowder's" without actually building both the monster and the chowder, then your arguments are all but worthless. With PC classes, features are more important than numbers...but a monster's features generally are their numbers, so you need to find the numbers before you judge them.

Half-Giant doesn't have enough to make up for a lost level
There are two sides to the level adjustment coin. This is one of them. The second is, would you play a normal race if its LA was lower?
The half-giant has enough boons that I'd need a specific reason to play anything else, if I was planning a build that could use some of them. Why play a dwarven fighter when you can get extra strength, use bigger weapons, and get a handful of helpful little perks (fewer than the dwarf gets, but applicable more often)? There are reasons, but they're much more situational or narrow than the reasons why you'd play a dwarven fighter over (say) a human.

Luccan

2019-07-02, 03:56 PM

There are two sides to the level adjustment coin. This is one of them. The second is, would you play a normal race if its LA was lower?
The half-giant has enough boons that I'd need a specific reason to play anything else, if I was planning a build that could use some of them. Why play a dwarven fighter when you can get extra strength, use bigger weapons, and get a handful of helpful little perks (fewer than the dwarf gets, but applicable more often)? There are reasons, but they're much more situational or narrow than the reasons why you'd play a dwarven fighter over (say) a human.

This is basically my problem with the LA +0 argument on this (and several previous ratings). The LA is supposed to be a trade-off. Maybe that trade-off doesn't work for you specifically, but there are still reasons to play this with an LA especially since it's LA+1. Without that adjustment, there's little reason to play a variety of other LA +0 races, at least from a optimization perspective. And if you aren't so concerned about optimization, then 1 LA isn't really anything to worry yourself over.

Falontani

2019-07-02, 04:29 PM

I think the biggest problem with comparison builds, is just how differently I'll build something with race a to do thing a, compared to race b to do thing a.

If I were to use the current example: a human psychic warrior spiked chain fighter will look much different than a water orc, an ogre, or a half giant version.

With a human version I would be a lot more flexible with my feats, giving me something like:
Human barbarian 2/fighter 1/psychic warrior 2/war mind 7/heir of Syberys 3/Witch Slayer 5
With the usual trip feats, mage slayer, supernatural opportunist, and the Dragonmark of the sentinel.

Orc would be more like:
Barbarian 2/fighter 1/psychic warrior 2/war mind 10/psychic warrior 5
Using trip feats, practiced manifester, and trying to increase how many power points I can squeeze out of it, possibly swapping psy warrior for ardent in its entirety.

Half Giant would be:
Barbarian 2/fighter 1/psychic warrior 4/war hulk 4/psychic warrior 9.
Use the argument that your only considered large when it benefits you to turn warhulk levels on and off whenever you choose (except when expanded)

Don't get me started on a Changeling version

danielxcutter

2019-07-02, 04:54 PM

While likely not going to influence the LA, half-giants are, after all, of the giant type, and thus have automatic proficiency with all martial weapons - useful if you go Ardent or Wilder.

Inevitability

2019-07-04, 06:56 AM

Half-giant:

As a sidenote, while I like to see the arguments for and against people's ratings, they do sometimes make it a bit hard for me to see just *what* your proposed rating is (and I'm not quite comfortable with automatically interpreting arguments as ratings). Bolding your vote makes it much easier for me to find, so please consider doing it!

+0: 6 votes
+1: 9 votes

Anyway, +1 for the tallbois, next are intellect devourers.

Inevitability

2019-07-04, 07:39 AM

Intellect Devourer

https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/forgottenrealms/images/f/f0/Intellect_devourer-3e.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/350?cb=20190507141455

Intellect devourers: 6 HD small-sized psionic aberrations that take over your skull, eat your brain, and walk around in your corpse. Charming.

Ability-wise, the only stat that stands out is 21 dexterity. Everything else gets small (+2 to +4) bonuses. Defensive qualities are quite impressive: DR 10/adamantine, PR 23, fire immunity, and electricity resistance are all pretty good things to have. +5 natural armor is useful too (you try finding armor that fits a walking brain), but the four natural claws are garbage (1d3 damage does not a viable attack make).

Of course, it's the special abilities that are really interesting here. Chief amongst them is Body Thief, which allows the intellect devourer to take over the body of a helpless or dead creature as long as it's not undead, a construct, or wearing a +1 heavy fortification buckler. The size limit is kind of weird: everything Small and up is fair game. Any time someone asks you how your devourer is merging with a kobold smaller than itself, point at the (Su) denotation and shrug. The only small downside is that you can't control a specific body for more than seven days.

Taking over a body, in addition to the important cosmetic effects, allows you to learn the victim's former languages and gives you essentially everything a Polymorph spell would grant (with the obvious exception that you're not turning into a general creature, but one specific example). Interestingly, this takeover might very well include certain class features (up to and including spellcasting). Ask your DM, and wear a helmet when you do so.

Aside from this, intellect devourers also have blindsight (60 ft.) and some PLAs. Those are at-will Cloud Mind, Detect Psionics, 2d4 Ego Whip, +5 Empty Mind, and three-target Id Insinuation. They also get 3/day 2d12 Body Adjustment, Intellect Fortress, and Painful Strike. Of those, a few are just garbage (I'll just go use Painful Strike on my 1d3 claws, that sounds smart), but most are decent. The lack of scaling is a bit annoying, though.

Finally there's the strange weakness that Protection From Evil prevents intellect devourers (who haven't lost their evil subtype somehow) from touching the affected creature, as if the devourer were summoned.

Intellect devourers are tricky to rate. Early on, I suppose their good defenses and moderate-to-okay PLAs can let them stand their own in combat, especially if they get a good body thrown their way every few days. Later on, however, they suffer from a lack of obvious advancement. While Body Thief need never become obsolete, the other abilities become less and less useful as time goes on.

In the end, +1 is a fair rating. The devourer can use (abuse?) Body Thief to great lengths, but not to the extent that it needs an asterisk. Losing a level is a fair penalty, though.

MisterKaws

2019-07-04, 08:38 AM

PR 23 (that means a level 8 caster needs to roll a 15 to overcome), DR 10/Adamantine (way too expensive for ECL 6), and at-will Polymorph that's potentially more powerful but requires a material component (corpse). Plus Blindsight. I say that's way too strong for ECL 6. The at-will Polymorph at least makes it equal to, if not better than a same-level Transmuter/Egoist, with the added benefit of having absolutely no level cap on the creature, as well as taking their elite array, if any.

It does lack scaling, but just with the toys it has, it can certainly be a decent front-liner if the party gets nice corpses, and a good assassin otherwise. I say +2 if(and only if) the Body theft ability is limited to polymorph's HD limit(which it isn't by default) and -0* otherwise.

To make it easy to Inevitability: my vote is LA -0*.

javcs

2019-07-04, 09:49 AM

Body Thief earns them one hell of a DM caution marker. And the 7 day time limit hurts because you constantly need too find new bodies, and once you leave a body, you can't use it again.

Also, since they have the Evil subtype, their actual alignment doesn't matter for their vulnerability to Protection From Evil.

Leaving out Body Thief ... I have to call them -0!
Sure, they have nifty stats and some nice qualities ... but they are massively dependent on body stealing to contribute, and have way too many RHD to go caster/manifester.

Blue Jay

2019-07-04, 09:54 AM

By my reading, the Body Theft ability is still subject to all the same limitations as a polymorph spell. The text refers you to the polymorph spell, so the way I see it, all the rules for polymorph apply unless the text of the Body Theft ability specifically states otherwise. So for example, the HD cap still applies because there's nothing in the text that says it doesn't; but it hasthe added restriction that oozes are off the table (crit immunity blocks Body Theft).

So, to me, it's a significant nerf to polymorph, but it's still polymorph, so it's quite good for ECL 6. I wouldn't count on getting the host's class abilities from this, either; so my vote assumes that's off the table. I think I'll vote LA +1* for the intellect devourer, which I think is conservative. LA +0* might also be appropriate.

Mike Miller

2019-07-04, 10:07 AM

I could see +0 for the intellect devourer, but I vote +1

MisterKaws

2019-07-04, 10:14 AM

By my reading, the Body Theft ability is still subject to all the same limitations as a polymorph spell. The text refers you to the polymorph spell, so the way I see it, all the rules for polymorph apply unless the text of the Body Theft ability specifically states otherwise. So for example, the HD cap still applies because there's nothing in the text that says it doesn't; but it hasthe added restriction that oozes are off the table (crit immunity blocks Body Theft).

So, to me, it's a significant nerf to polymorph, but it's still polymorph, so it's quite good for ECL 6. I wouldn't count on getting the host's class abilities from this, either; so my vote assumes that's off the table. I think I'll vote LA +1 for the intellect devourer, which I think is conservative. LA +0 might also be appropriate.

It says you can turn into the creature you eat. It also says you can eat anything with specific restrictions. If you eat a Battletitan, which you can, you can then turn into it, because Body Thief says you can turn into whatever you eat.

Blue Jay

2019-07-04, 10:19 AM

It says you can turn into the creature you eat. It also says you can eat anything with specific restrictions. If you eat a Battletitan, which you can, you can then turn into it, because Body Thief says you can turn into whatever you eat.

It doesn't say "anything" or "whatever" anywhere: it says "a creature of Small size or larger," not "any creature of Small size or larger." By my reading, that language is not a clear lifting of the HD cap, so it doesn't lift it.

MisterKaws

2019-07-04, 10:28 AM

It doesn't say "anything" or "whatever" anywhere: it says "a creature of Small size or larger," not "any creature of Small size or larger." By my reading, that language is not a clear lifting of the HD cap, so it doesn't lift it.

Does it limit the HD of what you can eat? There's nothing saying it does. And anything you can eat, you can turn into. Similar to Polymorph, but not limited like polymorph.

The ability is pretty much game-breaking compared to other shape-changing abilities.

javcs

2019-07-04, 10:29 AM

I'm certain that Body Thief warrants a DM caution marker.

Remuko

2019-07-04, 10:47 AM

MisterKaws

2019-07-04, 11:12 AM

I'll change my vote, and also specify it in the first reply. +2 with Body Thief and house-ruled limitations, - 0* without it.

Bavarian itP

2019-07-04, 11:24 AM

I'll change my vote, and also specify it in the first reply. +2 with Body Thief and house-ruled limitations, - 0* without it.

Why would you need a DM caution marker without Body Thief?

MisterKaws

2019-07-04, 11:34 AM

Why would you need a DM caution marker without Body Thief?

Without the hoiseruled limitations. The +2 is basically my recommendation for a potential DM reading this.

Sorry for the bad wording.

Zaq

2019-07-04, 12:55 PM

Body thief references polymorph, which is available with no questions asked (to a T1 class, granted) by ECL 7. Unlike with polymorph, you have to actually have access to the victim rather than just being able to imagine it. It does seem to scale.

Aberration HD are really bad. The stats are unremarkable, but at least there are no penalties. The defensive abilities (DR 10/ adamantine, immunity to fire, meaningful electricity resistance) are notable. Vulnerability to PfE is kind of weird and I’m honestly not sure how much of a negative it is. The PLAs are mostly useful, though I agree that the lack of scaling will be noticeable. Still, they aren’t awful.

The anatomy issue is, well, different on this one. Usually no thumbs, but it can get thumbs via body thief. It might have a bit of a time making sure that its equipment works on whatever body it steals, but it can also steal bodies that maybe already have equipment. Not sure how to carry equipment when between bodies, though.

For advancement, I can actually see some kind of thief-archetype class (rogue, ninja, psychic rogue, scout, etc.) being interesting. 1d3 isn’t much for claws, but you get four of them, so tacking on precision damage (especially, though not only, with Craven) is an obvious choice. Body thief is a fun way to add weird infiltration utility, and a few of the PLAs fit the archetype as well. The sticking point is 6 HD with garbage skill points (that is, honestly, quite painful), but I think it could still be viable, albeit nontraditional.

I’m surprised at how viable I think this thing is. I’m actually waffling between +0 and +1, with the argument for +1 being simply that it might be best to force ECL 7 before allowing a polymorph effect. If the PLAs scaled, I think +1 would be appropriate, but as is, I think I’ll vote +0 for now. I’m willing to be convinced otherwise, though.

MisterKaws

2019-07-04, 01:34 PM

I got home, so I can bicker argue about how broken Body Thief is.

I'll divide the wording a bit, so we can better understand it:

As a full-round action that provokes attacks of opportunity, the devourer can merge its form with that of a helpless or dead creature of Small size or larger. The devourer cannot merge its body with that of a creature immune to extra damage from critical hits.

That should mean it can merge with any helpless creature that is not immune to critical hits, yes? Good, let's go on:

When an intellect devourer completes its merging, it psionically consumes the brain of the victim (which kills it if it is not already dead). The devourer can exit the body at any time as a standard action, bursting the victim’s skull and resuming its normal form.

It kills the victim. No questions asked. I'll come back to this later. Continuing:

After consuming its victim’s brain, an intellect devourer can instead choose to animate the body for up to seven days as if it were the victim’s original brain. The devourer retains its hit points, saving throws, and mental ability scores, as well as its psi-like abilities. It assumes the physical qualities and ability scores of the victim, as if it had used polymorph to assume the victim’s form. As long as the intellect devourer occupies the body, it knows the languages spoken by the victim and very basic information about the victim’s identity and personality, but none of the victim’s specific memories or knowledge.

Now, here's the point. It doesn't mention it actually using Polymorph. It just says it assumes whatever physical abilities a Polymorph into said form would give. What does this mean? It means that whatever your party can kill, you can turn into for seven days.

And that's kind of a problem. Do you know why? Let me give you an example: Stormwrack page 142: Huge Monstrous Crab. It's a CR7 monster, meaning it's a monster you'll meet at CR7 in any common seaside adventure. We all know that crabs in D&D are categorically broken for their CR, and the only thing stopping players from abusing them themselves is their high HD. Well, body thiefs only cares that you beat it before. This means you get a seven-day period of being That Crab.

Barely any ECL 7 martial player can compete with That Crab on any aspects, and you can get to become it as long as your party can kill it once for you.

Oh, and remember when I said I'd come back to the second paragraph? Here's the thing: you can kill the goddamn Tarasque. As long as you can get a couple Allips(Dip Rogue 1 and grab UMD x9) to hit him a couple times(the Tarrasque still has a 50% chance of hitting them due to DR/Epic, so you need a couple of them), then he'll fall unconscious, and then you just use Body Thief. On the freaking Tarrasque. And that's a single level dip!

The ability needs a house-ruled limit to HD/level or just a rewrite.

lord_khaine

2019-07-04, 01:42 PM

Now, here's the point. It doesn't mention it actually using Polymorph. It just says it assumes whatever physical abilities a Polymorph into said form would give. What does this mean? It means that whatever your party can kill, you can turn into for seven days.

Interestingly enough, you should be a good deel stronger than it.
Im a little rusty on polymorph rules. But as i recall, you keep supernatural abilities.
That means a Crap with DR and PR.

So yeah, if the party kills it you get to ride it for a week.
Thats why my vote is LA +2

ExLibrisMortis

2019-07-04, 02:29 PM

I have always skipped over this monster on account of the hideous artwork. Turns out it's quite interesting.

I have to agree with MisterKaws: there is no HD limit on Body Thief. You get "physical qualities and ability scores as if you had used polymorph", meaning that it copies only those rules from polymorph that determine what physical qualities and ability scores you get (including inheritance from alter self). In other words: you get your victim's Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, size, movement modes (up to 120 feet flying or 60' otherwise), natural armour, natural weapons, racial skill bonuses/feats, "gross physical qualities", and extraordinary special attacks, but no extraordinary special qualities, supernatural abilities, or spell-like abilities.

I'll go with +0 for this one. Body Thief is neato, and though the rest is sort of mediocre, it will allow you to build a nice beatstick with infiltration and stealth, and some useful defensive abilities.

ViperMagnum357

2019-07-04, 02:53 PM

Intellect Devourer: this thing looks like it should get a big 'ol asterisk, first of all. But does it? Body Thief is yet another poorly defined ability that a creature is built around; how useful it is depends entirely on DM fiat. First off, this thing is LA -0 without that ability, those not far off from even.

Because Body Thief specifies physical characteristics 'as polymorph', I think you only gain (Ex) attacks, not qualities, (Su), or SLAs; since that is the clarification following the physical characteristics description in Polymorph, and the Body Thief ability itself does not state or imply anything different. You also get the languages and vague memories bit to compliment copying a specific creature, which is honestly not much. And no where does it say you gain or alter HD, which is in neither description.

Overall, the ability functions as a 7 day polymorph with some restrictions; unless the DM makes a habit of throwing immensely powerful physical bruisers at the party, this should not be too unbalancing. Overall, I lean towards LA +1 for this thing. Mediocre chassis buoyed by one trick you need to build around, but can more than hold its own if you go for broke by seeking out specific corpses to preserve until needed.

lord_khaine

2019-07-04, 03:36 PM

Another interesting detail.
Depending on how you read its ability, then an argument could be made for that that it gets the specific ability scores of whatever it takes over.
And not the default MM version.

No brains

2019-07-04, 04:00 PM

...the hideous artwork.

Seconded. It's a brain with chicken legs cut and pasted onto it. Maybe Illithid magic an photoshop matter, but I'd like to imagine they could do it in a little less of a corny way. It's even sort of at odds with the Illithid aesthetic. Why chicken feet? Maybe it hides in skulls because it's ashamed of how it looks.

As for how the monster plays, I'm in favor of +1*. 6HD aren't impossible to recover from. Body Thief is a little too strong. It's too easy to take a dragon down to 0 Dex and then get an expendable minion.

In case it comes down to semantics, I would support any numeral on +x* LA. I don't want us to rule it as +0 no asterisk because I voted slightly wrong.

Thurbane

2019-07-04, 04:52 PM

Their appearance has changed little since 1E, although they were sometimes referred to more as having "frog-like" bodies...

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2f/Intellect_devourer.JPG

Efrate

2019-07-04, 04:59 PM

I am torn between +1* and +2*. It is generally a sidegrade to polymorph, having potentially fewer forms but drastically longer duration. With a little work and some help from caster friends you can find a ton of stuff that is a significant upgrade, like racial spell casting, etc which you would likely get. If nothing else the best of the things you kill for physical prowess you get, and the form is kind of disposable. It's a single trick but a really good trick.

It is a reasonable sneak and infiltrator. Dr 10/most things helps a ton with survivability, blindsight is great, na is reasonable until you get something specifically crafted for you, and jts stats are solid everywhere. Sadly lack of normal hands to take advantage of that plus 10 dex for ranged combat hurts when it's not possessing something. Lack of chakras hurts the 4 attacks as an easy path to totemist unfortunately.

I think +1*, but I can see an argument for +2*. Polymorph is that good.

Zancloufer

2019-07-04, 06:49 PM

I think it might get a +1, maybe +0. Strong +0 though.

The big thing with Body Theft is that (A) you need a body and (B) that body can only be used once, or for seven days. So if you want to constantly swap forms (like you can with polymorph) you need a literal pile of dead bodies. Also you can't become anything that isn't at least small sized.

Yes in THEORY this sounds absolutely bonkers but in practice it's limited to enemies that you can kill and keep the intact body of. Yes you could posses a epic level creature at ECL 7 and get crazy high stats, but if the party manages to get an intact body of an epic level creature there is some other problem at play here that has nothing to do with the Intellect Devourer.

It's pretty much something the DM has to keep in mind when planning encounters but it's only as broken as the DM allows it to be.

EDIT: Quick update as I went to check it's actual stat block. It DOESN'T care how many/what HD the creature had. You keep the HP/HP/BaB/Saving throws you had. You only steal it's physical ability scores, it's Ex attacks, movement. You don't gain extraordinary special qualities, Supernatural powers or Spell like abilities. Not sure about spells but they probably wouldn't count with them falling under some combination of things your not allowed to steal.

MisterKaws

2019-07-04, 06:57 PM

Zancloufer

2019-07-04, 07:13 PM

Problem is: more than half monsters have a HD of 10+ higher than their CR. That means you'll either need to make custom monsters or never ever send bruisers to fight your players.

Fighting mages every time is gonna get boring eventually.

How does 10+ their CR in HD matter that much? How much better raw stats does a 17 HD monster have with 10/11 base stats than a level ~7 Barbarian who was using PC stat generation? You keep your own crappy aberration HD you just gain their Ex movement/attacks and their physical stats.

MisterKaws

2019-07-04, 07:45 PM

How does 10+ their CR in HD matter that much? How much better raw stats does a 17 HD monster have with 10/11 base stats than a level ~7 Barbarian who was using PC stat generation? You keep your own crappy aberration HD you just gain their Ex movement/attacks and their physical stats.

Higher HD monsters have, more often than not, higher base stats, higher space/reach, and stronger attacks. Just look at every level-appropriate Crab and you'll notice. And you get to keep your class abilities since it's based on polymorph, so at higher levels you could be looking at a Colossal Monstrous Crab with Rapid Strike and Lion Totem Pounce. that's six 4d6 claw attacks with 8d6 constrict, with 37 Strength, and potentially higher with your party Cleric/Wizard buffing.

And if you get equipment that changes shape to your monster form? Oh boy, that gets ridiculous fast.

Blue Jay

2019-07-04, 08:30 PM

I got home, so I can bicker argue about how broken Body Thief is.

"Bicker"? No, I don't think there's an argument here. I think your reading is valid, but I think it's a far less productive and useful reading.

I look at the text, and I see several restrictions listed (dying or helpless, Small or larger, not immune to crits, etc), but I don't see a "wrap-up" line saying "other than this, you've got it."

So when the text later refers to polymorph, which has further restrictions listed, it seems like a perfectly logical reading to assume that the restrictions there also apply, because nothing in the Body Theft text prevents them from applying. Furthermore, the HD limit listed for polymorph is almost certainly the kind of restriction a DM will want to apply to Body Theft, so it's highly likely that any DM who reads the text of the ability is going to be biased in favor of including that restriction.

Granted, it's also possible to read it as saying that only a few specific lines of the polymorph rules apply here. But, keep in mind that, when faced with an ability that's potentially game-breaking, the general practice in this project has been to rate the monster as if the shenanigans won't be allowed, then apply the asterisk (*) to say that the rating is only meaningful if the DM takes steps to prevent the shenanigans.

See the wight (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=22274621&postcount=74) and the shambling mound (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=22274621&postcount=74) for parallel examples.

So, in light of that, I think I want to add the asterisk to my rating: my vote will be LA +1*. I'll go edit it in to my previous post.

MisterKaws

2019-07-04, 08:57 PM

"Bicker"? No, I don't think there's an argument here. I think your reading is valid, but I think it's a far less productive and useful reading.

It's a joke.

Anyway, the reading seems clear to me, in that, by RAW, it would allow the player to pull that sort of crap. Obviously any sane DM is gonna use their Book Throwing(Ex) the moment they see it, but we gotta warn the folks who come to read this thread from the archive, don't we? Lots of people feel kind of scared of chasing players away by removing a powerful ability, even when it's this game-breaking.

Dimers

2019-07-05, 12:49 AM

You can HD-advance an intellect devourer to make it larger, but it can still fit in a Small body ... :smallconfused:

Body Thief is powerful but has substantial limits. I think the defensive abilities would make more of a difference on a day-to-day basis, depending of course on the GM and millieu.

The devourer would be a good choice in certain campaigns, for stealth, infiltration and some antisocial social stuff. Consider the usefulness of at-will two-size-smaller compression for stealth. Its skill-poor RHD are offset by +24 in useful skills (not counting the +10 effective Hide from compression), an Int bonus, and the fact that its higher stats factor into all skills.

Obviously the devourer wouldn't be an optimal choice for all campaigns. But for those it fits, it's a notably good choice. LA +1*.

Thurbane

2019-07-05, 02:00 AM

I wonder if a Tsochar and Intellect Devourer can "share" the same body?

OgresAreCute

2019-07-05, 04:14 AM

I wonder if a Tsochar and Intellect Devourer can "share" the same body?

An intellect devourer with Assume Supernatural Ability or Morphic Transfer could take over a Tsochar's body and then use its Wear Flesh ability. Occupying the same body I'm not sure about, since the intellect devourer needs the body to be dead prior to getting in there while a body possessed by a Tsochar is either alive (inhabit) or kept alive by the tsochar (replace). I suppose since inhabit doesn't destroy the nervous system, a Tsochar could inhabit a body controlled by an intellect devourer.

remetagross

2019-07-05, 04:30 AM

An intellect devourer with Assume Supernatural Ability or (meta)Morphic Transfer

Exactly. These feats check for "you change your form" for Metamorphic Transfer, so the Intellect Devourer qualifies; and the "ability to assume a new form magically" (which checks since the Devourer ability is (Su)) and you need to be able to change through a "polymorph self spell or a similar effect" for Assume Supernatural Ability, so you check that too.

These feats greatly enhance the value of Body Theft.

There's also the fact that a friendly caster can use Planar Ally/Planar Binding or any other [calling] effect to conveniently provide bodies for the party Devourer to snatch...

I will vote for LA +1, so as to make the Polymorph effect available no sooner than ECL 7.

Caelestion

2019-07-05, 04:36 AM

LA +1* is a minimum rating, I agree, though I completely agree with Paizo making Polymorph a 5th-level spell in Pathfinder, because the spell really is that good.

OgresAreCute

2019-07-05, 05:15 AM

Exactly. These feats check for "you change your form" for Metamorphic Transfer, so the Intellect Devourer qualifies; and the "ability to assume a new form magically" (which checks since the Devourer ability is (Su)) and you need to be able to change through a "polymorph self spell or a similar effect" for Assume Supernatural Ability, so you check that too.

These feats greatly enhance the value of Body Theft.

There's also the fact that a friendly caster can use Planar Ally/Planar Binding or any other [calling] effect to conveniently provide bodies for the party Devourer to snatch...

I will vote for LA +1, so as to make the Polymorph effect available no sooner than ECL 7.

It even has +4 racial to charisma and ML 7th so it qualifies and is well suited for Metamorphic Transfer. Would actually be pretty cool/fun to play, I think.

I'm not going to vote on this monster though, it's a bit too complex for me to easily assess and I don't wanna use my brain.

lord_khaine

2019-07-05, 05:23 AM

How does 10+ their CR in HD matter that much? How much better raw stats does a 17 HD monster have with 10/11 base stats than a level ~7 Barbarian who was using PC stat generation? You keep your own crappy aberration HD you just gain their Ex movement/attacks and their physical stats.

Just to provide the most basic example. The level 8 barbarian might start with a 16 in strenght and increase it to 18 with his stat points.
Or be a ½ orc and end up with 20.

A CR 7 Hill giant meanwhile starts with 25.
And if the ID finds a Hill giant warrior then it can quickly end up with 30 or higher.

Thats base strenght, before someone smacks a bulls strenght on either of them for +4.

edit.

And of course, PC's being what they are, this will start a macaber corpse collection campaign.
Everything and their dead grandmother are going to end up in some sort of storage after the PC's kill it.
Preserved by magic, and pulled out when something needs to get violently murderet.

Caelestion

2019-07-05, 08:25 AM

And of course, PC's being what they are, this will start a macaber corpse collection campaign.
Everything and their dead grandmother are going to end up in some sort of storage after the PC's kill it.
Preserved by magic, and pulled out when something needs to get violently murderet.

Gentle Repose our speciality! We store 'em, you wear 'em.

MisterKaws

2019-07-05, 08:32 AM

Gentle Repose our speciality! We store 'em, you wear 'em.

I'd say Quintessence since they're Psionic.

Celestia

2019-07-05, 09:19 AM

But, keep in mind that, when faced with an ability that's potentially game-breaking, the general practice in this project has been to rate the monster as if the shenanigans won't be allowed, then apply the asterisk (*) to say that the rating is only meaningful if the DM takes steps to prevent the shenanigans.
Nope. That is incorrect. The way it works when encountering a problematic ability is to apply the asterisk and then rate the monster as if the ability didn't exist. A lot of people seem to have forgotten that as I'm seeing many votes for +1* and higher based on the power that Body Theft provides. That's not how it works. Either it gives an asterisk or it bumps up the LA, but not both.

That's why I'm giving it the rating of -0*. Without accounting Body Theft, the intellect devourer just doesn't have anything going for it.

Edit:

Some monsters and templates may be marked with an asterisk. In such a case, the rated material has abilities that are not simply strong, but entirely game-breaking. Examples include an efreeti's ability to grant essentially unlimited free Wishes, or a nightmare's ability to use ridiculously powerful high-level spells at-will at a very low ECL.

In such a case, no LA is going to make these monsters truly balanced, with the resulting PCs being either one-trick ponies or overpowered abominations. Instead, they will be rated as if they didn't possess the offending ability, with the asterisk indicating the actual statblock cannot be rated properly. Anyone wanting to play these creatures is advised to simply do away with the ability in question.

lord_khaine

2019-07-05, 10:31 AM

Gentle Repose our speciality! We store 'em, you wear 'em.

I'd say Quintessence since they're Psionic.

I would say whatever the party has the easiest access to.

Of course, funny enough, this focus on bodysnatching means that the best class is likely warblade/swordsage.

Bavarian itP

2019-07-05, 10:35 AM

Nope. That is incorrect. The way it works when encountering a problematic ability is to apply the asterisk and then rate the monster as if the ability didn't exist. A lot of people seem to have forgotten that as I'm seeing many votes for +1* and higher based on the power that Body Theft provides. That's not how it works. Either it gives an asterisk or it bumps up the LA, but not both.

That's why I'm giving it the rating of -0*. Without accounting Body Theft, the intellect devourer just doesn't have anything going for it.

Edit:

Thank you, that was the source of my confusion in #1430.

MisterKaws did nothing wrong! :smallredface:

Blue Jay

2019-07-05, 02:04 PM

It's a joke.

Apologies for my failure to communicate. I often get so focused on "intellectualizing" about stuff that I forget to be human.

Nope. That is incorrect. The way it works when encountering a problematic ability is to apply the asterisk and then rate the monster as if the ability didn't exist. A lot of people seem to have forgotten that as I'm seeing many votes for +1* and higher based on the power that Body Theft provides. That's not how it works. Either it gives an asterisk or it bumps up the LA, but not both.

That's why I'm giving it the rating of -0*. Without accounting Body Theft, the intellect devourer just doesn't have anything going for it.

That makes the LA entirely meaningless. Body Thief is central to the Intellect Devourer's identity: without that ability, you're not really playing an Intellect Devourer. You're making the creature's LA contingent on it not having its signature ability. That's like saying, "sure, you can play a shapeshifter, but you just can't change your shape" or "you can play a fire elemental, but you can't set things on fire." Functionally, that's no different from assigning it an em-dash.

And it's not like this is entirely unprecedented. Sure, it's written up that you're supposed to eliminate the ability entirely, but in practice, that's only been done about half the time when an asterisk was assigned. Consider the grisgol, where only "abusive uses" of the open SLA were excluded from the rating; and the shambling mound, where the infinite shenanigan, and not the entire ability, were excluded. The phasm's Alternate Form ability (which is much more broken than Body Thief) was not only incorporate into the rating, but wasn't even given an asterisk, in spite of the acknowledged shenanigans that were possible.

MisterKaws

2019-07-05, 02:15 PM

Apologies for my failure to communicate. I often get so focused on "intellectualizing" about stuff that I forget to be human.

That makes the LA entirely meaningless. Body Thief is central to the Intellect Devourer's identity: without that ability, you're not really playing an Intellect Devourer. You're making the creature's LA contingent on it not having its signature ability. That's like saying, "sure, you can play a shapeshifter, but you just can't change your shape" or "you can play a fire elemental, but you can't set things on fire." Functionally, that's no different from assigning it an em-dash.

And it's not like this is entirely unprecedented. Sure, it's written up that you're supposed to eliminate the ability entirely, but in practice, that's only been done about half the time when an asterisk was assigned. Consider the grisgol, where only "abusive uses" of the open SLA were excluded from the rating; and the shambling mound, where the infinite shenanigan, and not the entire ability, were excluded. The phasm's Alternate Form ability (which is much more broken than Body Thief) was not only incorporate into the rating, but wasn't even given an asterisk, in spite of the acknowledged shenanigans that were possible.

Genies are entirely about wishes and getting trapped and stuff and their LA was statted as not having the Wish SLA. There's a precedent at least.

OgresAreCute

2019-07-05, 02:18 PM

Genies are entirely about wishes and getting trapped and stuff and their LA was statted as not having the Wish SLA. There's a precedent at least.

To be fair, "getting trapped" isn't really a good character concept. :smallamused:

MisterKaws

2019-07-05, 02:49 PM

To be fair, "getting trapped" isn't really a good character concept. :smallamused:

Isn't that the whole concept behind the Rogue?

No brains

2019-07-05, 03:01 PM

Isn't that the whole concept behind the Rogue?

Yeah, but you want to play Factotum so you can get MLG trapped. :smallcool:

We should probably think up a new thread name.

Still carrying a torch for I have no mouth and I must S, V, M . Though the dumb brain monster doesn't have a mouth, it taunts me with componentless psionics.

remetagross

2019-07-05, 03:20 PM

I Believe we had put LA, LA, Land in the backburner last thread because the current one was the only Opportunity for the play on word with "VI".

MisterKaws

2019-07-05, 03:31 PM

Could always go with a Final Fantasy VII pun. Can't go wrong.

Caelestion

2019-07-05, 03:32 PM

LA LA Land, don't you mean? It doesn't really work with those interstitial commas.

Zaq

2019-07-05, 04:12 PM

I like I Have No Mouth and I Must [V, S, M].

DeTess

2019-07-05, 04:23 PM

Wait what. When did we reach the high 40's again?

Caelestion

2019-07-05, 04:34 PM

About the time we notched up over 1400 posts?

Efrate

2019-07-05, 05:14 PM

By Pelor's shining arse these go by fast!

I will vote for La La Land. Have we covered MoP yet? Cause with that title the dreamheart book should be Mandatory.

Thurbane

2019-07-05, 05:23 PM

I also vote LA LA Land.

Remuko

2019-07-05, 08:13 PM

And were on page 50! Pack it up everyone!

MisterKaws

2019-07-05, 08:14 PM

We're 27 posts from being thread-locked now?

Elkad

2019-07-05, 08:44 PM

I'm in (again) for I Have No Mouth and I Must [V, S, M]

Mystic Muse

2019-07-05, 09:06 PM

Gonna throw my vote in for La La Land.

Dimers

2019-07-05, 10:55 PM

The way it works when encountering a problematic ability is to apply the asterisk and then rate the monster as if the ability didn't exist. ... That's why I'm giving it the rating of -0*. Without accounting Body Theft, the intellect devourer just doesn't have anything going for it.

Ah, right, I'd been misinterpreting it as only "DM take caution". I'll change to LA +1 with no asterisk, in that case, because the intellect devourer has a substantial but not overpowering amount going for it.

Luccan

2019-07-06, 01:01 AM

I'm in (again) for I Have No Mouth and I Must [V, S, M]

I'll put in another vote for this as well, though it seems to be an uphill battle. Yeah this thread went fast-ish; only been 5 months!

OgresAreCute

2019-07-06, 03:08 AM

I'm in (again) for I Have No Mouth and I Must [V, S, M]

I also vote for this.

DeTess

2019-07-06, 03:12 AM

I'm in (again) for I Have No Mouth and I Must [V, S, M]

*starts counting*

Ehm, sixthed?

danielxcutter

2019-07-06, 08:48 AM

I prefer LA LA Land, though I wouldn't be too miffed if we do the other instead.

ViperMagnum357

2019-07-06, 12:24 PM

I'm in (again) for I Have No Mouth and I Must [V, S, M]

My vote is with this one.

unseenmage

2019-07-06, 01:19 PM

I prefer LA LA Land, though I wouldn't be too miffed if we do the other instead.

I prefer this one.

MisterKaws

2019-07-06, 01:24 PM

Eh, I'll vote for I Have No Mouth and I Must [V, S, M].

By the way, 17 posts from threadlock now?

Zancloufer

2019-07-06, 01:31 PM

I'm in (again) for I Have No Mouth and I Must [V, S, M]

This. I think it sounds more on topic than "LA LA Land"

Windcaller

2019-07-06, 02:55 PM

My vote goes for (can I even vote?) I Have No Mouth and I Must [V, S, M]. LA LA Land sounds like a terrible joke.

unseenmage

2019-07-06, 03:03 PM

My vote goes for (can I even vote?) I Have No Mouth and I Must [V, S, M]. LA LA Land sounds like a terrible joke.

But that's the best quality of LA LA land...

No brains

2019-07-06, 03:58 PM

Little nitpick, the intended order is [S, V, M] since that kind of works out to 'scream' in my head.

Which is more powerful? Getting the order right, or puns?

MisterKaws

2019-07-06, 04:01 PM

Little nitpick, the intended order is [S, V, M] since that kind of works out to 'scream' in my head.

Which is more powerful? Getting the order right, or puns?

But screams are a Verbal component.

Caelestion

2019-07-06, 04:03 PM

My vote goes for (can I even vote?) I Have No Mouth and I Must [V, S, M]. LA LA Land sounds like a terrible joke.

I'm not sure you've noticed the titles of the other threads, but...

MisterKaws

2019-07-06, 04:50 PM

I'm not sure you've noticed the titles of the other threads, but...

Yes, they're the worst puns I've seen in my life.

The collective hivemind of the playgrounds sometimes does strange things.

Celestia

2019-07-06, 04:58 PM

But screams are a Verbal component.
I think they mean that SVM vaguely looks like an abbreviation of scream. Which is the entire pun.

MisterKaws

2019-07-06, 05:26 PM

I think they mean that SVM vaguely looks like an abbreviation of scream. Which is the entire pun.

Look again.

Caelestion

2019-07-06, 07:32 PM

Little nitpick, the intended order is [S, V, M] since that kind of works out to 'scream' in my head.

Which is more powerful? Getting the order right, or puns?

Obviously puns. The title makes no sense without it.

Zaq

2019-07-07, 12:52 AM

My vote goes for (can I even vote?) I Have No Mouth and I Must [V, S, M]. LA LA Land sounds like a terrible joke.

I’m not super fond of “LA LA Land” because I think of it as “ell-ay” not as “lah.” So the title is, in my brain, “ell-ay ell-ay land,” which sounds bizarre. Like, remember back when eBay advertisers were all about using the godawful sequence of symbols “L@@K” in their spiel, causing sane people to say “what is it you want me to latatk at?” That. For all I know, that’s still true. Haven’t even glanced at eBay in years.

Between [V, S, M] and [S, V, M], I prefer the former. I like emphasizing the verbal component (since that’s what screaming would be, and it’s why having no mouth is troubling), and I don’t parse [S, V, M] as “scream.” Maybe without the commas? Probably not even then. [V, S, M] still highlights the joke. Even better, I say.

OgresAreCute

2019-07-07, 05:52 AM

I’m not super fond of “LA LA Land” because I think of it as “ell-ay” not as “lah.” So the title is, in my brain, “ell-ay ell-ay land,” which sounds bizarre. Like, remember back when eBay advertisers were all about using the godawful sequence of symbols “L@@K” in their spiel, causing sane people to say “what is it you want me to latatk at?” That. For all I know, that’s still true. Haven’t even glanced at eBay in years.

Between [V, S, M] and [S, V, M], I prefer the former. I like emphasizing the verbal component (since that’s what screaming would be, and it’s why having no mouth is troubling), and I don’t parse [S, V, M] as “scream.” Maybe without the commas? Probably not even then. [V, S, M] still highlights the joke. Even better, I say.

For the joke to work, you need to know that it's supposed to be "scream" anyway, so I don't think putting it as S V M adds much in that regard. I'm ambivalent towards the ordering of the letters myself, anyway.

Unavenger

2019-07-07, 05:55 AM

I like I Have No Mouth and I Must [V, S, M].

Yeah, this one is good.

Celestia

2019-07-07, 07:49 AM

Between [V, S, M] and [S, V, M], I prefer the former. I like emphasizing the verbal component (since that’s what screaming would be, and it’s why having no mouth is troubling), and I don’t parse [S, V, M] as “scream.” Maybe without the commas? Probably not even then. [V, S, M] still highlights the joke. Even better, I say.
Well, it's not a visual pun. If you say out loud "I have No Mouth, and I Must [S, V, M]," you can hear the pun (sort of) with the reference priming you for it. [V, S, M], on the other hand, means nothing. It ruins the pun for no gain. It does not emphasize the V as all three letters are grouped together in brackets, subconsiously serving more as one unit than three. The order of the letters only matters for the pun.

Caelestion

2019-07-07, 08:00 AM

No brains

2019-07-07, 10:23 AM

To be fair, though, [S, V, M] only makes any sense at all if you realise it's a twisted reference to spell components. The pun simply doesn't work that well either way.

As a different suggestion, how about I Have No Mouth And I Must Level Up or I Have No Mouth And I Need XP?

I didn't expect my funpost thread name to start a debate. I may finally get a thread title, but was it worth it?! History will judge me... :smalltongue:

There's also a literal reference to the fact that inhuman anatomy ends up being a factor in a lot of -0 rulings, something that brought on arguments for and against magic item slots on creatures. Between that debate now and the Eye-Bolas early in the last thread, we've been aching for this joke for over 100 pages.

GreatWyrmGold

2019-07-17, 10:59 PM

(you try finding armor that fits a walking brain)
Helmets.

Just look at every level-appropriate Crab and you'll notice.

And that's kind of a problem. Do you know why? Let me give you an example: Stormwrack page 142: Huge Monstrous Crab. It's a CR7 monster, meaning it's a monster you'll meet at CR7 in any common seaside adventure.
Wrong. You will find monstrous crabs in some seaside adventures, a category which may or may not be common depending on your campaign. An argument based on specific monsters that will never appear in most campaigns is a bad argument.

Oh, and remember when I said I'd come back to the second paragraph? Here's the thing: you can kill the goddamn Tarasque. As long as you can get a couple Allips...
Rule of thumb: Any argument involving the Tarasque and allips is theoretical enough to be of no use beyond intellectual interest.

There's a fragment of a good point in this post, but it's expressed poorly enough that it sounds like a stupid point. It turns "This ability lets you take control of extremely powerful creatures" into "There are a few specific ways to break this power, if you find the right monsters".

Overall, the ability functions as a 7 day polymorph with some restrictions; unless the DM makes a habit of throwing immensely powerful physical bruisers at the party, this should not be too unbalancing.
Eh...most adventures are going to have at least one fairly physically-powerful monster. It's not going to break the game if you don't run into just the wrong things, but it could easily become unbalanced if you get the wrong monster at the wrong time. (Worse, it's tough to tell what monsters are going to be problematic if the DM doesn't judge specific monsters with that possibility in mind.)

Intellect devourers need a big fat asterisk just for the arguments over how their central ability works...but it's weaker than polymorph in most cases (there are relatively few monsters that are more disruptive to emulate for a week than whatever you used to kill them), so I don't think they'd need more than a +2 to be balanced. And by "weaker" I mean "less versatile," because half of what makes polymorph awesome is that you just need one or two feats to be able to solve almost any problem with a bit of creativity or MM digging. Losing the ability to turn into any creature, at any time, is a big downgrade. (Never mind also losing 1st- and 2nd-level spells.)

For the joke to work, you need to know that it's supposed to be "scream" anyway, so I don't think putting it as S V M adds much in that regard.
It makes it a reference and a pun instead of just a reference.

For now, my votes are +0*/+1 and Some FF7 pun, the latter because of the upcoming remake that's been in the news. Not that I can think of any appropriate FF7 puns, but if one comes up it has my vote.