LA Assignment Thread X: New Year, New Management, Same Old Unplayable Monsters

[Troacctid]

Fast healing is also a lot more than 15 hit points when you stretch it over multiple combats. If you have +20 max HP and you take 20 damage, you effectively don't have those hit points in your next fight. With fast healing, that's not the case.

(I still can't believe we're actually debating whether fast healing is enough to take you over +0 LA. And there are people arguing for -0! What is this upside-down world we live in?)

[danielxcutter]

This probably doesn’t influence the LA either way, but how cheap are Lesser Vigor wands again?

Actually do Lesser Vigor wands affect undead? I forget the specifics of those rules.

[Troacctid]

This probably doesn’t influence the LA either way, but how cheap are Lesser Vigor wands again?

Actually do Lesser Vigor wands affect undead? I forget the specifics of those rules.

They cost thousands of gold over the course of your career, plus whatever investment into UMD in order to use them. And undead are immune to them.

How cheap are mind-affecting immunity and continuous death ward?

[liquidformat]

Energy drain gives them -1 to everything and -5 HP. You don't care if it kills them. It's a stacking debuff and extra damage in one.

When did fast healing become +0 LA? Last I checked, the feral template was one of the few +1 LA templates that's actually worth it, mainly because the fast healing is such a big advantage. Auto-refilling your health between combats is a big deal and would never be +0. Also, losing 12 HP because of a lower Con score is a nightmare, but regaining 15 HP over the course of a combat is useless?

You've also quietly glossed over mind-affecting immunity, permanent death ward, and auto-passing all Fortitude saves.

I always thought the +1 was more due to picking up Improved Grab, Pounce, Rend and rake (yes I know the boards have some arguments over if a normal character should get these but in play I have never had a dm who doesn't give them). In general even though fast healing is nice and saves you wealth because you don't have to worry about having a healing belt or wand of vigor it isn't very helpful inside of combat for a frontline beatstick like Necromental, it doesn't really have much effect inside of combat once you hit level ~3. On the other hand not having any con bonus actively makes you worse at being a beastick and makes you easier to kill. Why should we care that a Necromental is immune to so many things when its going to be the first and easiest thing to kill on the battle field through pure damage.

[Debatra]

(I still can't believe we're actually debating whether fast healing is enough to take you over +0 LA. And there are people arguing for -0! What is this upside-down world we live in?)

If all this template did was grant fast healing, you would be right. But it also absolutely tanks your mental stats (thus forcing you to be a beatstick or a blender), gives nothing that really helps you to be a beatstick or blender beyond the fast healing, and removes your Constitution score (which actively hinders you being a beatstick or blender). No matter how good anything is, -0 can always happen if the cost is too great.

[H_H_F_F]

If all this template did was grant fast healing, you would be right. But it also absolutely tanks your mental stats (thus forcing you to be a beatstick or a blender), gives nothing that really helps you to be a beatstick or blender beyond the fast healing, and removes your Constitution score (which actively hinders you being a beatstick or blender). No matter how good anything is, -0 can always happen if the cost is too great.

I'd like to echo this. I voted for +0, but the point still stands: no one is arguing fast healing and undead immunities are bad, no one is saying fast healing and undead immunities are -0. They're saying that in this case, they're not worth the price.

The discussion has gone in circles for quite some time now. Even if you disagree, Troacctid, can you acknowledge (and argue against) the point everyone is actually making?

"Template downsides force you into a frontline melee role. A small undead would be bad at this role, other options lose too much Con."

You're kind of strawmanning everyone else in this discussion. This is not an accusation. I don't think you're arguing in bad faith, because I've read enough of your posts to know you're a very productive member of these forums.

I got the impression maybe you were just "stuck" in your own frame of thinking on this issue, which is why I tried to simplify and clarify the view that has been generally presented here.

[Caelestion]

please note 1 Cha is playable, nowhere in the rules are you barred from having 1 cha or wis.

Just like a commoner is technically playable, right? I wouldn't play anything with a stat of less than 5, myself.

[Troacctid]

Well first off that's flat incorrect—it locks you out of traditional casting, but that's not the same as locking you into melee beatstick. You could also be an archer, an invoker, a binder, a meldshaper, etc. Intelligence and Charisma are probably the two most common dump stats. A lot of builds can afford to lose them. Warforged still see plenty of play despite their mental penalties, for example. Is there really that big a difference between a 6 and a 1 in your dump stat?

Furthermore, the crux of that argument is that the creatures gaining the template are bad, irrespective of the template itself being bad. You can't tell me a necromental elf would be +0, right?

So, in short, it does not in fact force you into a melee role, and a dearth of good base race options doesn't reflect on the template's power level in a vacuum.

[H_H_F_F]

Well first off that's flat incorrect—it locks you out of traditional casting, but that's not the same as locking you into melee beatstick. You could also be an archer, an invoker, a binder, a meldshaper, etc. Intelligence and Charisma are probably the two most common dump stats. A lot of builds can afford to lose them. Warforged still see plenty of play despite their mental penalties, for example. Is there really that big a difference between a 6 and a 1 in your dump stat?

Furthermore, the crux of that argument is that the creatures gaining the template are bad, irrespective of the template itself being bad. You can't tell me a necromental elf would be +0, right?

So, in short, it does not in fact force you into a melee role, and a dearth of good base race options doesn't reflect on the template's power level in a vacuum.

Good points all around.

I do think we need to look at the base creatures - but I agree we shouldn't judge the template based on their power. I've been very aware of that bias, and tried very hard not to do it. Still, we need to look at the base creatures and decide how much adding the template would be beneficial to them. As a dumb example, a template changing all your HD's to dragon HD's (including new BaB etc) would be rated much lower if it was available only to outsiders, since it would improve them much less than it would, say, animals. With that in mind, I'll leave the elf aside for the time being - we'll all get to discuss how useful undead immunities are to an elf in the very next monster.


Now, when I look at the elementals, I see a pretty clear pattern. Smaller variants, being small, like to keep their distance. Could make decent Cha/Wis based entries, or at least entries with features tying onto those. Wis could only get to 11 at 4 HD (ECL 5, if we go +1). Cha is a dumpster fire.
Larger variants want to be in the enemies' face. Losing Con would hurt them a lot - that's the reason you yourself flagged out mainly the smaller types. Warforged, by the way, have excellent Con.

If we can agree we're not talking about melee right now, and see that discussion as settled (if only for the purposes of this one) let's look into the options you presented.

Archers are very hard to make work, and usually lend themselves to very skillful base classes. Undead meldshapers are similiarly tough, though it's maybe a decent option? Invoker and binder... hmmm. Lots of options are out the door with your Cha set to one, and most binders with Cha that low will find themselves mainly in melee. However, I can see an Eldritch Blast type air elemental, for example, as getting value from this. Dump everything but Dex, and go flying around doing direct damage.

So, in my view, there are definetly specific entries that would benefit from this. It'd be a way to gain some serious defensive capability by playing into the strength of the role you were going for to begin with, if that role feats, and dump everything else.

This is not a useless template. +0 doesn't mean useless. It means "situationally good to take, but generally not worth a level", no?

To me, that is exactly what this template is. Can I see an entry that would get good value from this at +0? Sure. Enties should get value from templates that fit them - that's the whole point here. Do I see it as a "steal", a "must take" or "broken" at +0? Hardly.

[Troacctid]

This is not a useless template. +0 doesn't mean useless. It means "situationally good to take, but generally not worth a level", no?

No—it means the benefits of the template are so minor as to have no real impact on power level (e.g. desert-dweller), or that the drawbacks of the template are generally more severe than the benefits (e.g. amphibious). "More severe" is a key here—since players will always build to minimize the drawbacks and maximize the benefits, an equal balance between them would actually be tilted in the benefit's favor. A template that is a meaningful net-positive benefit, but not strong enough to be worth a class level, is +1 LA.

[H_H_F_F]

No—it means the benefits of the template are so minor as to have no real impact on power level (e.g. desert-dweller), or that the drawbacks of the template are generally more severe than the benefits (e.g. amphibious). "More severe" is a key here—since players will always build to minimize the drawbacks and maximize the benefits, an equal balance between them would actually be tilted in the benefit's favor. A template that is a meaningful net-positive benefit, but not strong enough to be worth a class level, is +1 LA.

I agree with the last sentence, but this is very situationally a net positive. You don't want to give something that's a net positive a +1 because then everyone will take it. This template has strengths and drawbacks, with the drawbacks generally outclassing the benefits, but a character can be specifically built to make use of it. In my opinion, this is a very similar case to amphibious, with more oomph for both sides. Take a heavy freaking beating, but get something in return that may be worth it, depending on your character. That was the point I was trying to make earlier, though you just made it way more clearly and succinctly (for amphibious).

[Troacctid]

Fast healing, energy drain, auto-passing Fort saves, and mind-affecting immunity are hardly what I'd call situational. They're good pretty much all the time, on just about any build. Necromental is much more comparable to mineral warrior than amphibious creature: it gives great defensive benefits and adds extra oomph to your melee attacks, but it penalizes your mental abilities, limiting the types of characters who can use it effectively. And as you can see, mineral warrior is still a solid +1 despite its limitations.

Even if the benefits were specific to a particular build, that's not a reason to hand that build this much free power for nothing. The unseelie fey template is widely considered overpowered at +0 LA for that reason. (And you'll notice that unseelie fey nerfs your durability much like necromental does, giving you a Con penalty and making you take extra damage from weapon attacks.)

[H_H_F_F]

If we're back at discussing melee, I should again point out Con is very important. Unseelie fey is op because it's upside is good for builds that care less about the downside, and that are highly powerful. This one hurts across the board - there is basically no entry that doesn't care about any of the mental stats and about Con. Is it worth it sometime? Yeah, but not in a way that's equovalent to Unseelie Fey IMO, and for sure not to Mineral Warrior.

I feel like I'm starting to talk in circles, so unless I change my mind or come up with something substantive, I feel like I've said enough about thia template.

[Thurbane]

You're really not, though. A (for instance) Crusader only loses Indomitable Soul and Smite; that's not bad.

Quite a lot of Crusader manoeuvres that have a DC are based off Cha, so there is that too.

(I still can't believe we're actually debating whether fast healing is enough to take you over +0 LA. And there are people arguing for -0! What is this upside-down world we live in?)

As I've said a few times, if the template gave the ability to inflict 1 negative level per round and gave fast healing 3, with no downsides, I would eaily be voting +1.

But when evaluating templates/monsters we weight up the downsides as well as the positives.

IMHO, the downsides of the template drag it to -0. You're free to disagree, of course, but that's why we have multiple votes, to get a diversity of opinions.

How cheap are mind-affecting immunity and continuous death ward?

Pretty cheap, if you take Necropolitan into account.

If all this template did was grant fast healing, you would be right. But it also absolutely tanks your mental stats (thus forcing you to be a beatstick or a blender), gives nothing that really helps you to be a beatstick or blender beyond the fast healing, and removes your Constitution score (which actively hinders you being a beatstick or blender). No matter how good anything is, -0 can always happen if the cost is too great.

And also shoehorns you into a relatively small pool of (decent) base creatures to qualify.

[Blue Jay]

The main issue I am seeing is in other cases we have identified one or more spells or templates to get us up to 3+ int. Choosing not to include the spells/templates in the evaluation of the monster and simply handwaving it because they are there is quite different then not having any that could be used. In this case the only way to achieve 3+ Int seems to be having a magic item like headband of intelligence which adds it own set of problems. Specifically you need to be ECL 5-6 before WBL would allow you to afford the headband which puts you into large or larger elemental territory as your only way to achieve that is through RHD wand said elementals are already -0 creatures.

I feel like your assumption about how a creature gains its playable Intelligence score is having too much impact on your rating. For reference, here's the project's guideline about low Intelligence scores:

"If a monster normally has less than three Intelligence (such as animals or mindless creatures), we assume the creature somehow manages to get to at least three Intelligence, as that is the minimum for sentience in D&D 3.5e. Because the specific method(s) used may affect its other stats, we have no default method for doing this and just assume that part is handled at the individual tables."

You're assumption that the player will have to use a specific method has led you to not even consider some potential base creatures in your assessment, like magmins or thoqquas or Small elementals. And I think those monsters are going to be the ones where the template's LA is most important.

Even in the case that we are handwaving away the base 1 issue you are effectively taking -10 int (min 3 int) setting wis to 10 and cha to 1 (since neither of these effect playability) all non RHD HD are normal for your class without con mods. Undead immunities are nice but with everything being based around Cha and specifically having 1 cha you have the makings of a pretty horrid setup, getting fast healing and an ignorable bonus to AC isn't a bonus it is absolutely mandatory to try and make you somewhat less killable since you are forced into beatsticking and have lower hp than everything else you are being compared with. And Energy drain while helpful at once per round it isn't enough to make a difference much less design a build around. You are being forced into tier 5 classes with very little capability to do anything in or out of combat.

I feel like these undead weaknesses are being greatly overstated. At this point in my "career" as a DM, I feel like I've had a pretty exceptional amount of experience DMing for monster PCs, and it really hasn't been my experience that undead PCs are unusually fragile; or, at least, that the fragility of undead PCs is a particularly glaring weakness. The immunities seem to have much more frequent impacts on the game than the low number of hit points.

And I don't really agree that you'll necessarily be restricted to a simple beatstick role. An air necromental with Flyby Attack could be a sort of hit-and-run/skirmish debuffer. A thoqqua necromental with Spring Attack could do something similar with burrowing charges. The magma hurler from Miniatures Handbook has a ranged natural weapon that packs a pretty good punch, so there's potentially an opportunity for a ranged necromental build.

I am just not seeing where people are getting +1 out of this template it is a hot pile that makes you worse at everything, what path are you seeing that would make this competitive with any tier 3 build?

Well, we do go as low as tier 4 for our comparison points, so there's that.

[Thurbane]

"If a monster normally has less than three Intelligence (such as animals or mindless creatures), we assume the creature somehow manages to get to at least three Intelligence, as that is the minimum for sentience in D&D 3.5e. Because the specific method(s) used may affect its other stats, we have no default method for doing this and just assume that part is handled at the individual tables."

That's a solid point. Still, I stick by -0* for my vote, due to overall downsides.

[Mystic Muse]

-0* myself. So much of this has to be changed for me to consider it viable.

[Debatra]

The votes so far, updated to Post 1082:

+1 - Troacctid, Lilapop, Blue Jay
+0 - H_H_F_F, Beni-Kujaku, PoeticallyPsyco, Caelestion, Temotei, Lans
-0 - Thurbane, Mystic Muse, liquidformat, Remuko, danielxcutter, Falontani, TiaC

No—it means the benefits of the template are so minor as to have no real impact on power level (e.g. desert-dweller), or that the drawbacks of the template are generally more severe than the benefits (e.g. amphibious). "More severe" is a key here—since players will always build to minimize the drawbacks and maximize the benefits, an equal balance between them would actually be tilted in the benefit's favor. A template that is a meaningful net-positive benefit, but not strong enough to be worth a class level, is +1 LA.

So then by your thinking, how bad does something have to be before -0 is even possible?

[TiaC]

I'm going to say -0, no asterisk. The downsides are pretty major. A lot has been said about them, but an aspect I haven't seen much mention of is that the low skill points will wall off a ton of prestige classes.

As far as I can tell, there aren't any 1HD elementals and the 2HD ones are all Small. I'm pretty sure the best entry will end up being the Element Creature template on an Orc or something.

No asterisk because the create spawn is slow and uncontrolled, but also because you have to kill them with energy drain, not with damage, which is relatively difficult. Finally, it only works on a relatively rare creature type and will usually result in a weaker creature than the original. You're almost always better off taking an elemental domain and just commanding the elemental, rather than killing it in a drawn-out fight, waiting a few days and then commanding it. Slow and uncontrolled can lead to a plague scenario, but most campaigns don't have enough elementals for that to be a danger.

[danielxcutter]

Is the template even worth the CR increase? I can’t help but think that a template often used for beatsticks that cuts a large portion of their hit points out isn’t exactly that good.

I mean if it wasn’t for the serious mental penalty this would probably be nice. As it is, bleh. At least standard elementals didn’t care about their mental scores that much.

[Thurbane]

Is the template even worth the CR increase? I can’t help but think that a template often used for beatsticks that cuts a large portion of their hit points out isn’t exactly that good.

I mean if it wasn’t for the serious mental penalty this would probably be nice. As it is, bleh. At least standard elementals didn’t care about their mental scores that much.

I used the template on a Ruin Elemental as a guardian for a tomb once, worked OK against my mid-low op party.

[Troacctid]

So then by your thinking, how bad does something have to be before -0 is even possible?

It should be primarily a drawback OR add RHD. Incarnate construct and disembodied spirit are examples of the former. Some lycanthropes are examples of the latter. Zombies are a little of both.

[danielxcutter]

I used the template on a Ruin Elemental as a guardian for a tomb once, worked OK against my mid-low op party.

While that actually sounds cool, did it actually do anything better than a normal one couldn't? A Ruin Elemental would lose 70 hit points by taking this template.

It should be primarily a drawback OR add RHD. Incarnate construct and disembodied spirit are examples of the former. Some lycanthropes are examples of the latter. Zombies are a little of both.

Necromental does have two considerable drawbacks: losing your Constitution score and most of your mental stats.

Are there any significant drawbacks to being undead, inherent to the type itself, besides RP issues and losing your Con score actually? Healing gets tougher of course, but that's probably a minor one.

[Thurbane]

While that actually sounds cool, did it actually do anything better than a normal one couldn't? A Ruin Elemental would lose 70 hit points by taking this template.

From memory I gave it Improved Toughness to replace one of it's default feats, but yeah, still a lot of lost HP. Since it was guarding a tomb, the Necromental template was largely thematic more than for power reasons...

[danielxcutter]

From memory I gave it Improved Toughness to replace one of it's default feats, but yeah, still a lot of lost HP. Since it was guarding a tomb, the Necromental template was largely thematic more than for power reasons...

Yeah, that's fair enough. Sounds thematic enough for that at least.

[Debatra]

I'm going to say -0, no asterisk. The downsides are pretty major. A lot has been said about them, but an aspect I haven't seen much mention of is that the low skill points will wall off a ton of prestige classes.

As far as I can tell, there aren't any 1HD elementals and the 2HD ones are all Small. I'm pretty sure the best entry will end up being the Element Creature template on an Orc or something.

No asterisk because the create spawn is slow and uncontrolled, but also because you have to kill them with energy drain, not with damage, which is relatively difficult. Finally, it only works on a relatively rare creature type and will usually result in a weaker creature than the original. You're almost always better off taking an elemental domain and just commanding the elemental, rather than killing it in a drawn-out fight, waiting a few days and then commanding it. Slow and uncontrolled can lead to a plague scenario, but most campaigns don't have enough elementals for that to be a danger.

As has been mentioned, we've given asterisks to slow, inefficient, and/or otherwise difficult uncapped spawn abilities before. It's not technically a rule, but so far we could make it one without changing anything.

[liquidformat]

I feel like your assumption about how a creature gains its playable Intelligence score is having too much impact on your rating. For reference, here's the project's guideline about low Intelligence scores:

"If a monster normally has less than three Intelligence (such as animals or mindless creatures), we assume the creature somehow manages to get to at least three Intelligence, as that is the minimum for sentience in D&D 3.5e. Because the specific method(s) used may affect its other stats, we have no default method for doing this and just assume that part is handled at the individual tables."

You're assumption that the player will have to use a specific method has led you to not even consider some potential base creatures in your assessment, like magmins or thoqquas or Small elementals. And I think those monsters are going to be the ones where the template's LA is most important.

It's more that I am highlighting the issue of if we use an item to get high enough int you are actively making yourself worse. Plus there is some screwyness with using an item since it can be dispelled which opens up another can of worms.
Anyways besides an item I think we are left with DM fiat which does leave a bad taste in my mouth.

I feel like these undead weaknesses are being greatly overstated. At this point in my "career" as a DM, I feel like I've had a pretty exceptional amount of experience DMing for monster PCs, and it really hasn't been my experience that undead PCs are unusually fragile; or, at least, that the fragility of undead PCs is a particularly glaring weakness. The immunities seem to have much more frequent impacts on the game than the low number of hit points.

And I don't really agree that you'll necessarily be restricted to a simple beatstick role. An air necromental with Flyby Attack could be a sort of hit-and-run/skirmish debuffer. A thoqqua necromental with Spring Attack could do something similar with burrowing charges. The magma hurler from Miniatures Handbook has a ranged natural weapon that packs a pretty good punch, so there's potentially an opportunity for a ranged necromental build.

I mean these are all the standard rolls of an air elemental, thoqqua, and hurler to begin with and I don't think any of them are helped by adding in the necromental template. Thoqqua is already a -0 and I am not seeing how the template is helping it, you are slightly more resilient to non hp damaging attacks but more vulnerable to hp damage, then again if you designed the character to primarily focus on hiding underground and launching surprise attacks nothing changed there. Air Elemental skirmisher just sounds like a glass cannon to me though I suppose it depends on the build it might just skirt by. And the Hurler is pretty decent but that is because that Magma rock attack is quite powerful not necromental template.

Well, we do go as low as tier 4 for our comparison points, so there's that.

We go for tier 4 in cases where it best represents the monster like something with sneak attack and a lot of skills being compared to a rogue or something with rage to a barbarian. I was a bit unclear in my description of the necromental when I said it is tier 5. What I meant was even if we are grabbing something from tier 3 like an initiator the necromental seems closer in comparison to tier 5 since we are hard tanking mental stats you are really only fulfilling 1 role and often not doing an amazing job at it either which means you are often hitting tier 5 at best with most builds with a Necromental.

[Temotei]

This is tough for me, but after reading everyone's arguments, I think I'll vote for +0*.

[H_H_F_F]

I wonder if Necropolitan will be this divisive too.

[Troacctid]

I wonder if Necropolitan will be this divisive too.

The xp cost makes it easier to swallow as a +0.