Support the GITP forums on Patreon
Help support GITP's forums (and ongoing server maintenance) via Patreon
Page 25 of 50 FirstFirst ... 151617181920212223242526272829303132333435 ... LastLast
Results 721 to 750 of 1491
  1. - Top - End - #721
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Luccan's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    The Old West
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Quote Originally Posted by Nifft View Post
    Yes.

    In my evaluation, I've always assumed that if a monster was good at any specific thing, then it ought to be evaluated in a game where that specific thing was viable and relevant.

    If we're only supposed to think about high-tier things, then any monster which can't compete against a T1 spellcaster is automatically junk. And it seems like some people do evaluate based on that exact criteria.
    Ok, but that isn't exactly what I meant. I meant should tiers be thought of at all (so even the specifically T1 people should reevaluate their thinking). Look at what I wrote after the question. To expand on it: The warg is essentially a bundle of stat bonuses. Fantastic for a martial. But it gives up 4 levels of class abilities (and hands) for it. Now, I know there are ways to money around the hands problem (though notably it requires specific books), but on its own, you're stuck with a crappy bite attack (unless you go monk or another class that can ignore weapons). The question becomes, do the stat boosts make up for the loss of levels and hands, in any situation? That, I believe, is not a question of specific tier.

    I think I've come around somewhat to your point though, but at the theoretical (though undoubtedly probable) table where you're running a bunch of barbarians and rangers and that guy who insisted an expert could keep up, you'll have to make a judgement call. Which you kind of already have to do if you're offering players a bunch of weird monster races. Honestly, I've thrown myself into doubt on this whole venture.

    Quote Originally Posted by zergling.exe View Post
    +0 means that it should be able to function passably in a party of similar level characters. -0 means that it's too weak even for that, and that DMs should beware that it may need buffs or other considerations for how weak it is.
    Ok, that makes sense. Thank you
    Last edited by Luccan; 2017-11-10 at 02:30 AM.

  2. - Top - End - #722
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2013

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Quote Originally Posted by zergling.exe View Post
    +0 means that it should be able to function passably in a party of similar level characters. -0 means that it's too weak even for that, and that DMs should beware that it may need buffs or other considerations for how weak it is.
    And my argument is that Worg is not unbearably behind. It doesn't need any more consideration than a Barbarian in a party of t3s, or a CW Samurai surrounded by t4s. Not behind in a way that makes it utterly useless, and perfectly usable for one or two things(literal definition of t4, right there). Also, once you get into low-Epic, being behind four levels is shockingly low on the list of possible build problems.

    ...Again with the absurd optimization expectation, that list of "standard" gish builds has **** like being BAB +16 with Duskblade 5ths and 13 effective levels of Abjurant Champion for an effective AC boost of over 50, rules skirting for Body outside Body Wizard qualifying as a gish, multiple Sublime Chord builds being progressed by later PRCs and in the ranged category, a "Bard" setup that's getting Anti Magic Field.

    I'm considering a benchmark akin to the Lazy Benchmark on that post, but nixing Battle Sorcerer for a BAB dip. Not PRCs to qualify for PRCs advancing earlier PRCs, or using PRCs solely to substitute BAB levels. Most of those builds use three or more books and shenanigans aplenty.
    Last edited by Morphic tide; 2017-11-10 at 04:04 AM.

  3. - Top - End - #723
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Inevitability's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Planes of Law

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Target tiers are tricky: while generally I aim for tier 3, if a monster shows great similarity to a higher-tier class (like nagas and sorcerers) I will be balancing it against that class.
    Have you had enough of unreasonably high LA's and unplayable monsters in 3.5? Then check out the LA-assignment thread! Don't hesitate to give feedback!

    Extended signature!

  4. - Top - End - #724
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Caelestion's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Baator (aka Britain)
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Quote Originally Posted by Morphic tide View Post
    Also, once you get into low-Epic...
    At epic levels, pretty much every assumption is pretty much invalid.

  5. - Top - End - #725
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Inevitability's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Planes of Law

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    I'd like to briefly remind everybody that there's literally no practical difference between -0 and +0 LA and that any debate about specific creatures and their place is unlikely to change the way this ruleset will be used in actual games.
    Last edited by Inevitability; 2017-11-10 at 11:19 AM.
    Have you had enough of unreasonably high LA's and unplayable monsters in 3.5? Then check out the LA-assignment thread! Don't hesitate to give feedback!

    Extended signature!

  6. - Top - End - #726
    Titan in the Playground
     
    lord_khaine's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2006

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    I'd like to briefly remind everybody that there's literally no practical difference between -0 and +0 LA and that any debate about specific creatures and their place is unlikely to change the way this ruleset will be used in actual games.
    Did you for a brief moment forget where you are? who you are among? :P
    thnx to Starwoof for the fine avatar

  7. - Top - End - #727
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGirl

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Quote Originally Posted by Nifft View Post
    Got a citation for that?

    I'd be happy to be corrected about this.
    No, this is a 3 thread topic, and my memory could be faulty. I will see if I can find anything though.

  8. - Top - End - #728
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Inevitability's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Planes of Law

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Wraith


    It's amazing how repetitive the monster manual gets after a while. Case in point: the wraith, which is basically the same as the shadow and spectre, just in-between the two in terms of power. Ah well, at least it makes comparing them easy.

    The racial features aren't surprising. 5 RHD Undead with the incorporeal subtype, a touch attack that deals ability damage (constitution this time), good bonuses to what ability scores they do have, spawn creation, and turn resistance. Alertness and Improved Initiative as bonus feats are unique to this monster, and moderately useful.

    Unnatural Aura is annoying in a handful of cases, valuable in some others, and in general not worth mentioning. Daylight Powerlessness is a non-insignificant weakness (I assume it functions the same as the spectre's Sunlight Powerlessness), and constitutes somewhat of a reduction in overall playability.

    Compared to the spectre, the wraith has a better touch attack and free bonus feats, but the spectre has superior spawn creation and movement. In the end, I think a LA of +2* is justificable here: it allows shadows, spectres, and wraiths to all possess their own strengths and weaknesses, and makes each of them a viable option.

    Do discuss.

    Dread Wraith

    I stopped reading after seeing the RHD amount. I don't care these things are as dextrous as huge air elementals, dread wraiths are never going to catch up with their class level-enhanced lesser brethren, let alone humanoid PCs. -0* LA.
    Last edited by Inevitability; 2018-01-03 at 04:57 PM.
    Have you had enough of unreasonably high LA's and unplayable monsters in 3.5? Then check out the LA-assignment thread! Don't hesitate to give feedback!

    Extended signature!

  9. - Top - End - #729
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2013

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    I can see anything between +1 and +4, depending on how lenient the DM is with spawn and the Daylight Powerlessness. At least with a Vampire you have clearly defined rules for what happens if you get caught in a ray of sunshine-what does a wraith do, specifically? Forced to take move actions to get out of the light? Have their action economy and abilities hamstrung, but still able to move around? Take that out of the equation, and I would generally agree with +3, provided some limits on spawn.
    Last edited by ViperMagnum357; 2017-11-11 at 06:02 PM.

  10. - Top - End - #730
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2006

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Worgs are -0. You'd be better off as a Ranger or Barbarian, or a Trip-Fighter, depending on which of their main options you like better (tracking/scouting or tripping). Personally, I'd go with a human ranger. Sure, most of my stats won't be as good, but I'll be able to contribute far more of the time, and I'll be far less dependent upon others.


    Dread Wraith is a -0, no question.

    Wraiths ... Eh... Hard to judge properly.
    Daylight Powerlessness is potentially brutal, but also very campaign and DM dependent. I'd say that "utterly powerless" means that the only functional ability is the Unnatural Aura, and the Wraith cannot attack, or do anything other than to move to get out of the sunlight. I would also argue that Wraiths cannot intentionally/deliberately move into sunlight, even in passing, and if they encounter sunlight as part of their movement, they must either stop or avoid it.
    Unnatural Aura means that there better not be a druid or ranger in the party, and quite possibly noone with a familiar, either. And nobody's going to have a pack animal or minions with animals.
    You have pretty decent starting, but non-scaling, minionmancy. Your minionmancy will only ever get you wraiths. Now, this is good early, but since they don't carry abilities from life into wraithhood, it fades in value fairly quickly.
    No DM is ever truly out of tricks to mess with his/her players.
    No player is ever truly out of ways to surprise their DM.
    Spoiler
    Show

  11. - Top - End - #731
    Orc in the Playground
     
    Boggartbae's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    For Wraith's, I think it depends on if there constitution drain dc scales with racial hit dice, or total hit dice. If it's total, then it's a really powerful ability, that can be built around, and I would pay LA for it.

    The two most annoying things about being a wraith are the incorporeal nature, and the sunlight powerlessness, both of which can be mitigated with feats (ghostly grasp and endure sunlight). I'm not sure if I should be taking that into account, but they do help the wraith's playability.

    the undead type, the incorporeal subtype, the fly speed, and the +18 to stats are all really good.

    All together, I would pay 3 LA and no racial hit dice to play a wraith, but with 5 of the worst hit dice in the game, I wouldn't be happy paying anything over 1, so I think it should be +1 for a total ECL of 6
    LGBTitP

    Quote Originally Posted by ViperMagnum357 View Post
    I think I would agree with Boggartbae

  12. - Top - End - #732
    Banned
     
    Jormengand's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    In the Playground, duh.

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    What is it with otherwise-passable undead and being screwed over by a giant fireball? Ugh.

    Right, let's look at this. Five wasted levels, immunity to people waving nonmagical sticks at you, immunity to being actually effective or able to pick things up, a poke which is probably worse than anything else you were doing with your action, flight, -/+6/-/+4/+4/+4, and inability to adventure like a normal person. Ugh, +0. I don't even know what class you'd take that wouldn't balk at being set back 5 levels.

  13. - Top - End - #733
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Goblin

    Join Date
    May 2016

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    For the sake of consistency, I don't think you can go below LA +2 for the wraith, because the shadow is at ECL 7, and wraith is at least the shadow's equal. The wraith has some weaknesses that the shadow doesn't have, but the wraith's abilities are better all around. And as bad as undead RHD are, an ECL-7 wraith is getting 5 of them for the price of 3 shadow RHD. And it will also be in a much more favorable position for LA buyoff.

    So, I think LA +2 is the minimum. I think LA +3 is also justifiable.
    Last edited by Blue Jay; 2017-11-11 at 08:39 PM.

  14. - Top - End - #734
    Banned
     
    Jormengand's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    In the Playground, duh.

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    I'd rather judge things on their own merits than copy old mistakes; my vote isn't changing.

  15. - Top - End - #735
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    OrcBarbarianGirl

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Why am I here?

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Isn't sunlight powerlessness and possibly the unnatural aura rendered kinda moot by the fact that the wraith can phase into the ground? If a wraith ducks into the floor, it can get around LoE from the sun and its aura.
    Quote Originally Posted by Petrocorus View Post
    This thread, Questions that can't be answered... Answered by RAW by No brains, is Epic.
    Quote Originally Posted by illyahr View Post
    That is so stupid it's hilarious.
    Quote Originally Posted by georgie_leech View Post
    ...I've clearly been playing D&D for too long, because that made a demented kind of sense.
    Quote Originally Posted by that_one_kobold View Post
    And this is why I love D&D

  16. - Top - End - #736
    Troll in the Playground
     
    WhiteWizardGirl

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Jormengand do note most monsters don't carry magic sticks. And I can't think of one monster in the MM that has natural weapons that are just magical and not count as magical for the purposes of overcoming DR. And con damage is nice self scaling damage essentially. And the save will scale with level. Add in the other mix of Incorporeal fun like solid object skimming and they can get mean for 90% of the encounters, with only higher end outsiders and dragons requiring tactical thought. The problem as with most monsters is ADVANCEMENT, they really can't go anywhere besides the bland options. so +3 seems about right.

  17. - Top - End - #737
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2006

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Quote Originally Posted by No brains View Post
    Isn't sunlight powerlessness and possibly the unnatural aura rendered kinda moot by the fact that the wraith can phase into the ground? If a wraith ducks into the floor, it can get around LoE from the sun and its aura.
    That only helps for moving around. You'd need to spend a feat on Lifesight (admittedly, you'd probably do that anyways), in order to keep track of the party/enemies.
    Combat's a different question

    As for whether a Wraith can attack somebody in sunlight via standing underground ... it's a DM call, but I'd lean towards saying Daylight Powerlessness means that a Wraith can't attack someone in sunlight ... or rather, they cannot make their melee touch attacks against someone in sunlight.

    Hell. Daylight Powerlessness could be interpreted as shutting down any/all class abilities/features, not just racial ones.
    No DM is ever truly out of tricks to mess with his/her players.
    No player is ever truly out of ways to surprise their DM.
    Spoiler
    Show

  18. - Top - End - #738
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Quote Originally Posted by Blue Jay View Post
    For the sake of consistency, I don't think you can go below LA +2 for the wraith, because the shadow is at ECL 7, and wraith is at least the shadow's equal. The wraith has some weaknesses that the shadow doesn't have, but the wraith's abilities are better all around.
    Just curious, do you have a lot of campaigns that don't involve being above ground during the day?

  19. - Top - End - #739
    Orc in the Playground
     
    Boggartbae's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    technically, if you got life sight, you could poke them on the bottom of their foot, and never touch sunlight. I'm not sure what the rules for that are, other than that you would both have concealment from each other, so the enemy would be flatfooted if you hid, but you have a 50% mischance

    Also, don't diminish the power of the CON drain. It can be really nasty, and pumping the DC isn't that hard.

    At the end of the day though, wraiths are just really tanky melee types. Yeah they do a lot of damage thanks to the CON drain, but so does a fighter with power attack, and fighters don't auto fold to constructs and undead. Incorporeality gives you a lot of effective HP thanks to the miss chance, but you don't get any extra hp per level, so it kinda balances out.

    Still voting for +1, because the undead hit dice aren't completely irrelevant, just pretty bad.
    LGBTitP

    Quote Originally Posted by ViperMagnum357 View Post
    I think I would agree with Boggartbae

  20. - Top - End - #740
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Thurbane's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Terra Australis
    Gender
    Male

    Post Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!



    Wraith

    • Medium Undead
    • Incorporeal: very nice.
    • Fly 60 ft good: nice.
    • Cha as a deflection bonus to AC: good in the right build.
    • Incorporeal touch 1d4 + 1d6 Con: this is a very solid attack.
    • Create spawn: this is it's own can of worms. From good to broken good.
    • Darkvision 60 ft., +2 turn resistance, undead traits, unnatural aura: meh.
    • Daylight powerlessness: from inconvenient to crippling, depending on the game and what precautions you can take.
    • Str: --, Dex +6, Con --, Int +4, Wis +4, Cha +4: two non-abilities, net +18; fairly solid stats for the right build.
    • 5RHD: d12, poor BAB, good Will, 4 skill points/level (plus Undead immunities, of course)
    • OK-ish racial skill list.

    Flight, undead immunities, incorporeal, Con drain, create spawn; weighed up against 5RHD, sunlight powerlessness, lack of Str and Con. I'm voting LA +2 here. It has drawbacks, yes, but it also has some very strong positives.

    Dread Wraith: better version of above abilities, saddled with 16 RHD. LA -0, due to the sheer number of HD. In a 16th level game, you're ability to be an incorporeal Undead who creates spawn is going to be massively overshadowed by most other characters.

  21. - Top - End - #741
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Goblin

    Join Date
    May 2016

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Quote Originally Posted by Jormengand View Post
    I'd rather judge things on their own merits than copy old mistakes; my vote isn't changing.
    To me, it's less about whether we get something "right" (whatever that might mean), and more about being internally consistent. The worst result that can come from this project is that two equivalent monsters are assigned different starting ECLs.

    We've always been comparing like-to-like: nymph to druid, aranea to sorcerer gish, griffin1 to melee charger, etc. So, wraith-to-shadow seems the logical comparison to make. And, in my mind, the wraith should be at about the same ECL as the shadow. I'm leaning towards ECL 7 for the wraith, just to make it equivalent with the shadow; but, looking back, the discussion about the shadow seemed to be leaning towards ECL 6, but it was never resolved. If that's the case, I'd probably waffle between LA +1 and LA +2 for the wraith.

    Spoiler: End Note
    Show
    1Did anyone else notice that griffins don't get Improved Grab? So, a griffin can't pounce+grab+rake like a lion or tiger can. Weird.
    Last edited by Blue Jay; 2017-11-12 at 10:37 PM.

  22. - Top - End - #742
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Nifft's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Quote Originally Posted by Blue Jay View Post
    To me, it's less about whether we get something "right" (whatever that might mean), and more about being internally consistent. The worst result that can come from this project is that two equivalent monsters are assigned different starting ECLs.
    It looks like you're saying that you'd rather we actually be wrong twice, rather than admit to being wrong once.

    IMHO the worst result from this project is not providing useful numbers to people who need those numbers.

    Would "internal consistency" help a new DM more than accurate numbers?

  23. - Top - End - #743
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Goblin

    Join Date
    May 2016

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Quote Originally Posted by Nifft View Post
    It looks like you're saying that you'd rather we actually be wrong twice, rather than admit to being wrong once.

    IMHO the worst result from this project is not providing useful numbers to people who need those numbers.

    Would "internal consistency" help a new DM more than accurate numbers?
    What I'm saying is that this "right vs wrong" paradigm is not a productive way to achieve our ultimate goal, which is game balance.

    Consistency is the way to reach balance, not "right vs wrong" or "accurate vs inaccurate."

    It doesn't matter what numbers are assigned, but if they're being assigned inconsistently, they're useless.

    If they're consistent, they can still be balanced even if they're "wrong," because they're egalitarian in their wrongness.

    Also, consistent errors are easy to correct for. Inconsistent ones are not.

    So, whatever numbers we decide on, the last thing we should do is be inconsistent about it.

    If shadow is ECL 7, then wraith cannot be ECL 5 with a minus, because that's not balanced.

    I would fully support going back and editing, if we think it's necessary; I just thought that was taboo.
    Last edited by Blue Jay; 2017-11-13 at 12:58 AM.

  24. - Top - End - #744
    Orc in the Playground
     
    Boggartbae's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Quote Originally Posted by Blue Jay View Post
    What I'm saying is that this "right vs wrong" paradigm is not a productive way to achieve our ultimate goal, which is game balance.

    Consistency is the way to reach balance, not "right vs wrong" or "accurate vs inaccurate."

    It doesn't matter what numbers are assigned, but if they're being assigned inconsistently, they're useless.

    If they're consistent, they can still be balanced even if they're "wrong," because they're egalitarian in their wrongness.

    Also, consistent errors are easy to correct for. Inconsistent ones are not.

    So, whatever numbers we decide on, the last thing we should do is be inconsistent about it.

    If shadow is ECL 7, then wraith cannot be ECL 5 with a minus, because that's not balanced.

    I would fully support going back and editing, if we think it's necessary; I just thought that was taboo.
    But the shadow isn’t consistent. I went back and checked, and it’s LA is too high for what you get, especially compared to other LA assignments in this thread.

    Also, we’re not balancing against the rest of the monsters; we’re balancing against the rest of the game. The point is for a player to be able to say “hey, Can I play a wraith? The LA assignment thread says it’s worth this”. If the numbers given out are too high, then no one will play the monsters, just like before, and if the numbers are too low, then DM’s will have to say “no” more often, or put in more work to come up with their own LA assignment, and if they have to do that, then what’s the point of us doing it first?

    If these monsters and their racial HD can’t be made to fit in with the rest of the race/class combinations, then they are useless to player characters. That is the consistency we need, not internal consistency. It has to be fair when you sit down at a table with normal characters of the same ECL.
    LGBTitP

    Quote Originally Posted by ViperMagnum357 View Post
    I think I would agree with Boggartbae

  25. - Top - End - #745
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Goblin

    Join Date
    May 2016

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Quote Originally Posted by Boggartbae View Post
    But the shadow isn’t consistent. I went back and checked, and it’s LA is too high for what you get, especially compared to other LA assignments in this thread.

    Also, we’re not balancing against the rest of the monsters; we’re balancing against the rest of the game. The point is for a player to be able to say “hey, Can I play a wraith? The LA assignment thread says it’s worth this”. If the numbers given out are too high, then no one will play the monsters, just like before, and if the numbers are too low, then DM’s will have to say “no” more often, or put in more work to come up with their own LA assignment, and if they have to do that, then what’s the point of us doing it first?

    If these monsters and their racial HD can’t be made to fit in with the rest of the race/class combinations, then they are useless to player characters. That is the consistency we need, not internal consistency. It has to be fair when you sit down at a table with normal characters of the same ECL.
    I did say I would fully support going back and editing the shadow if we think it's necessary.

    But, I still disagree with your argument, because it's unrealistic to think we're going to get some sort of "overall consistency" with this project: the imbalances in the source material are too deep, the variation from table to table is too wide, and the range of opinions is too broad. The only realistic goal is to judge all The monsters as consistently as possible, which means we compare them to each other as we go.

    This sort of internal consistency is what will make a product useful and easy for DM's to work with. It doesn't really matter if we get the wraith "right": it just matters that we use a consistent standard to judge, because that makes it easy for DM's to adjust the product to their table.

    I vote for LA +2 for the wraith, on the assumption that we're not going to go back to edit the shadow. If we do edit the shadow, then I vote for LA +1 for the wraith.
    Last edited by Blue Jay; 2017-11-13 at 11:58 AM.

  26. - Top - End - #746
    Banned
     
    Jormengand's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    In the Playground, duh.

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Quote Originally Posted by Blue Jay View Post
    This sort of internal consistency is what will make a product useful and easy for DM's to work with.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nifft View Post
    Would "internal consistency" help a new DM more than accurate numbers?
    10character

  27. - Top - End - #747
    Troll in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGirl

    Join Date
    Dec 2014

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Quote Originally Posted by Jormengand View Post
    Would "internal consistency" help a new DM more than accurate numbers?
    Yeah, it would. Blue Jay is right when he says that balance is internal, not relative to some external standard. Main problem with LAs as-is is that you can't treat them uniformly--LAs are generally too high, but flat reductions produce a few game-breaking options. This thread assigns LAs with a more-or-less uniform idea of power levels behind it, something we (at least, I) don't think the WotC authors ever did. The exact numbers aren't so relevant, as long as you can apply +/-X across the board and still have a balance ("internal consistency").

    Now, Inevitability has chosen to aim for an internal balance that includes character classes at a certain optimization level (which is good). What Blue Jay is saying is that if, based on class balance and internal monster balance, you want to assign the wraith an LA that would make it much stronger than the shadow, you have to reconsider the wraith or the shadow, as per the same internal monster balance.

    Given that he's also gone back to the shadow and concluded that it's probably got LA on the high side, I don't see why you're asking stupid questions in quotes.
    Last edited by ExLibrisMortis; 2017-11-13 at 11:25 AM.
    Spoiler: Collectible nice things
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Faily View Post
    Read ExLibrisMortis' post...

    WHY IS THERE NO LIKE BUTTON?!
    Quote Originally Posted by Keledrath View Post
    Libris: look at your allowed sources. I don't think any of your options were from those.
    My incarnate/crusader. A self-healing crowd-control melee build (ECL 8).
    My Ruby Knight Vindicator barsader. A party-buffing melee build (ECL 14).

  28. - Top - End - #748
    Orc in the Playground
     
    Boggartbae's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Quote Originally Posted by Nifft View Post
    Would "internal consistency" help a new DM more than accurate numbers?
    Quote Originally Posted by ExLibrisMortis View Post
    Yeah, it would. Blue Jay is right when he says that balance is internal, not relative to some external standard. Main problem with LAs as-is is that you can't treat them uniformly--LAs are generally too high, but flat reductions produce a few game-breaking options. This thread assigns LAs with a more-or-less uniform idea of power levels behind it, something we (at least, I) don't think the WotC authors ever did. The exact numbers aren't so relevant, as long as you can apply +/-X across the board and still have a balance ("internal consistency”)
    No it wouldn’t. If DM’s need to assign their own level adjustments, then this project is as useless as the original level adjustments. Editing past mistakes is more helpful than making more of them.

    Second, most of the LA assignments have been pretty spot on, so the idea that we could move everything up and down and it will still be fine is silly, especially when you take into account -0 races. If we give the wraith too much LA, and then assume that DM’s will know that we intentionally made everything too high, then we could wind up in a spot where orcs and drow have the same LA, since they lowered everything by a uniform amount.

    Finally, and this is really important, no one reads this thread. If they want to play a monster, then they’re going to read inevitabilitie’s (very well written and informative) blurb that they find in the archived table, and that’s it. Only a small percentage of players will even realise that people argue on this thread about what number to assign, and even fewer will go back through the archive and find the argument on the monster they want to play; they’ll just grab and go. Couple this with the idea that it’s very hard to gauge how broken something is without playing first, and you will wind up with new DM’s and players feeling really disappointed that their wacky monster character over/under performed after trusting this thread to give them balance.

    TLDR: internal consistency means absolutely nothing; we need to be consistent with the rest of the game, or all of this will just be confusing and unhelpful.
    LGBTitP

    Quote Originally Posted by ViperMagnum357 View Post
    I think I would agree with Boggartbae

  29. - Top - End - #749
    Troll in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGirl

    Join Date
    Dec 2014

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Quote Originally Posted by Boggartbae View Post
    If DM’s need to assign their own level adjustments, then this project is as useless as the original level adjustments.
    Yes, that's why internal consistency is useful.

    Say the archive (for some reason known to the server gnomes only) gets corrupted in such a way that all listed LAs go up by 5 points (leaving aside the issue of -0 assignments; say they become -5 instead). Would that compromise the project at all? No, of course not. You just subtract 5 and everything is fine.

    The same applies to a hypothetical error in the balance between monsters and classes. As long as the error is made consistently, it is possible to apply an easy fix (such as +1, *2, -3.5 and round up) to close the gap. It would be possible to put a note on power levels in the archive ("If you play high-OP, subtract 1 from all LAs"), and to change the baseline power level by simply taking the data sheet and applying a function.

    Quote Originally Posted by Boggartbae View Post
    TLDR: internal consistency means absolutely nothing; we need to be consistent with the rest of the game, or all of this will just be confusing and unhelpful.
    Being consistent with the rest of the game is another form of internal consistency, just on a larger scale. Internal monster consistency (reflecting class consistency, such as it is) results from and contributes to the large-scale consistency.
    Spoiler: Collectible nice things
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Faily View Post
    Read ExLibrisMortis' post...

    WHY IS THERE NO LIKE BUTTON?!
    Quote Originally Posted by Keledrath View Post
    Libris: look at your allowed sources. I don't think any of your options were from those.
    My incarnate/crusader. A self-healing crowd-control melee build (ECL 8).
    My Ruby Knight Vindicator barsader. A party-buffing melee build (ECL 14).

  30. - Top - End - #750
    Titan in the Playground
     
    lord_khaine's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2006

    Default Re: The LA-assignment thread III: Now in HD!

    Yeah, it would. Blue Jay is right when he says that balance is internal, not relative to some external standard. Main problem with LAs as-is is that you can't treat them uniformly--LAs are generally too high, but flat reductions produce a few game-breaking options. This thread assigns LAs with a more-or-less uniform idea of power levels behind it, something we (at least, I) don't think the WotC authors ever did. The exact numbers aren't so relevant, as long as you can apply +/-X across the board and still have a balance ("internal consistency").
    Yes, that's why internal consistency is useful.
    Yes, it means that if i wanted to use the list, then i know i would just need to add on average 1 LA to the different monsters.
    thnx to Starwoof for the fine avatar

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •