LA with 2 hd creatures

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

I'm curious how everyone feels about creatures with more than one HD
that have LA. For instance creatures with 1 HD (humans, elves, goblins
etc) get to start out with a class level and basically a LA of +0. Some
creatures, planetouched, have 1 HD and an LA of 1 so in a lvl 2 party
they can have one class lvl and the racial traits make up for being a
level lower. Now when a player would like to play something unusual,
i.e. gnoll (2 HD), they have to pay for both monstrous HD and the LA
(of 1? this is from memory) basically what i am getting to is that HD 1
creautes get their HD for free while those with HD 2 or more have to
pay for the free 1 and anything on top of that, perhaps it would be
more fair to reduce all ECL for monstrous races with more than 1 HD by
one?

with the gnoll they could not enter play (for convience i'll require
them to have 1 level of some player class) until the party is level 4
so a level 1 fighter gnoll would have 3 HD and the racial bonuses. a
equilivant pc would be a lvl 4 human fighter, they have 4hd and
signicigantly more feats and hp (4d10 instead of 2d8 + 1d10) My basic
claim is that the gnoll pc is having to pay for a HD that other players
get for free. (also to claify the level 1 fighter gnoll would be
entitled to the same gold pieces worth of equipment as the lvl 4 human
fighter and progress using the same experience chart, i.e. both need
4000 xp for the next level)
i understand the whole LA, ECL, HD thing is a swamp with many
difficulties, but if would concentrate on the issue of playing a LA
creature with 2 HD instead of 1 HD i would greatly appreciate it.
i'm also new here so try not to be a total jerk if i am making a fool
of myself. thanks
43 answers Last reply
More about creatures
  1. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    ephemeralparadox@yahoo.com wrote:
    > I'm curious how everyone feels about creatures with more than one HD
    > that have LA. For instance creatures with 1 HD (humans, elves, goblins
    > etc) get to start out with a class level and basically a LA of +0. Some
    > creatures, planetouched, have 1 HD and an LA of 1 so in a lvl 2 party
    > they can have one class lvl and the racial traits make up for being a
    > level lower. Now when a player would like to play something unusual,
    > i.e. gnoll (2 HD), they have to pay for both monstrous HD and the LA
    > (of 1? this is from memory) basically what i am getting to is that HD 1
    > creautes get their HD for free while those with HD 2 or more have to
    > pay for the free 1 and anything on top of that, perhaps it would be
    > more fair to reduce all ECL for monstrous races with more than 1 HD by
    > one?
    >
    > with the gnoll they could not enter play (for convience i'll require
    > them to have 1 level of some player class) until the party is level 4
    > so a level 1 fighter gnoll would have 3 HD and the racial bonuses. a
    > equilivant pc would be a lvl 4 human fighter, they have 4hd and
    > signicigantly more feats and hp (4d10 instead of 2d8 + 1d10) My basic
    > claim is that the gnoll pc is having to pay for a HD that other players
    > get for free. (also to claify the level 1 fighter gnoll would be
    > entitled to the same gold pieces worth of equipment as the lvl 4 human
    > fighter and progress using the same experience chart, i.e. both need
    > 4000 xp for the next level)
    > i understand the whole LA, ECL, HD thing is a swamp with many
    > difficulties, but if would concentrate on the issue of playing a LA
    > creature with 2 HD instead of 1 HD i would greatly appreciate it.
    > i'm also new here so try not to be a total jerk if i am making a fool
    > of myself. thanks


    One suggestion I have seen here that seems to make some sense is to
    allow all creatures, not just the 1-HD ones, to exchange one of their
    racial levels for their first class level.

    Thus, humans change their one level of humanoid for their first level of
    commoner, aristocrat, fighter, cleric, or whatever.

    Gnolls change one of their two levels of monstrous humanoid for their
    first level of warrior, adept, ranger, druid, or whatever.

    The ordinary gnoll with 2 levels of monstrous humanoid and LA could
    begin adventuring with 1 level of monstrous humanoid, one level of
    Ranger, and LA.

    I think this seems fair and balanced. Also, it makes Nycters more
    attractive as a PC race. :^)

    - Ron ^*^
  2. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Werebat wrote:
    > ephemeralparadox@yahoo.com wrote:
    > > I'm curious how everyone feels about creatures with more than one HD
    > > that have LA. For instance creatures with 1 HD (humans, elves, goblins
    > > etc) get to start out with a class level and basically a LA of +0. Some
    > > creatures, planetouched, have 1 HD and an LA of 1 so in a lvl 2 party
    > > they can have one class lvl and the racial traits make up for being a
    > > level lower. Now when a player would like to play something unusual,
    > > i.e. gnoll (2 HD), they have to pay for both monstrous HD and the LA
    > > (of 1? this is from memory) basically what i am getting to is that HD 1
    > > creautes get their HD for free while those with HD 2 or more have to
    > > pay for the free 1 and anything on top of that, perhaps it would be
    > > more fair to reduce all ECL for monstrous races with more than 1 HD by
    > > one?
    > >
    > > with the gnoll they could not enter play (for convience i'll require
    > > them to have 1 level of some player class) until the party is level 4
    > > so a level 1 fighter gnoll would have 3 HD and the racial bonuses. a
    > > equilivant pc would be a lvl 4 human fighter, they have 4hd and
    > > signicigantly more feats and hp (4d10 instead of 2d8 + 1d10) My basic
    > > claim is that the gnoll pc is having to pay for a HD that other players
    > > get for free. (also to claify the level 1 fighter gnoll would be
    > > entitled to the same gold pieces worth of equipment as the lvl 4 human
    > > fighter and progress using the same experience chart, i.e. both need
    > > 4000 xp for the next level)
    > > i understand the whole LA, ECL, HD thing is a swamp with many
    > > difficulties, but if would concentrate on the issue of playing a LA
    > > creature with 2 HD instead of 1 HD i would greatly appreciate it.
    > > i'm also new here so try not to be a total jerk if i am making a fool
    > > of myself. thanks
    >
    >
    > One suggestion I have seen here that seems to make some sense is to
    > allow all creatures, not just the 1-HD ones, to exchange one of their
    > racial levels for their first class level.
    >
    > Thus, humans change their one level of humanoid for their first level of
    > commoner, aristocrat, fighter, cleric, or whatever.
    >
    > Gnolls change one of their two levels of monstrous humanoid for their
    > first level of warrior, adept, ranger, druid, or whatever.
    >
    > The ordinary gnoll with 2 levels of monstrous humanoid and LA could
    > begin adventuring with 1 level of monstrous humanoid, one level of
    > Ranger, and LA.
    >
    > I think this seems fair and balanced. Also, it makes Nycters more
    > attractive as a PC race. :^)
    >

    Not familiar with Nycters...

    Anyway it does seem reasonably fair to me as well.

    I was originally allowing replacing of all monster HD with class
    levels. Mainly because I wanted some giant clerics that weren't
    exteremly innefficient (woo. I'm CR 20 now but can cast as a 3rd lv
    cleric. woo.). I looked at some of the combinations possible though
    and it was clear that doing that would allow grossly overpowered
    characters, so I dropped it before anyone took advantage of it.

    My only concern is that is a Gnoll with 1 HD and 2 levels of ranger (or
    whatever class they might actually be good at) clearly better than a
    human with 4 levels of ranger, where a Gnoll with 2 HD, and 1 level of
    ranger isn't? - unless of course you don't mind slightly overpowered
    monster PCs. Not sure that I wouldn't, might encourage the players to
    actually try something different.

    I'd have to take a fairly close look before allowing this in a typical
    game though.

    - Justisaur
  3. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Jasin Zujovic wrote:
    > In article <1118951553.974670.324590@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
    > justisaur@gmail.com says...
    >
    > > I was originally allowing replacing of all monster HD with class
    > > levels. Mainly because I wanted some giant clerics that weren't
    > > exteremly innefficient (woo. I'm CR 20 now but can cast as a 3rd lv
    > > cleric. woo.).
    >
    > As a tangent, are giant clerics (for example) really that inefficient
    > for their CR? For their ECL, quote likely, but CR...?

    Not really, CR counting the levels as 1/2 makes up for the complete
    lack of synergy. Note that what this says is that they aren't
    inefficient clerics if levels as cleric cost them half as much as
    levels as fighter....

    But what does this say about their ECL? And presumably the giant
    (being an NPC) is advancing according to the same rules as PC's,
    so we are expected to believe that the average giant Cleric decided
    to take the 1/2 as effective option (and clerics are the listed
    advancement path for many Giant NPCs in their organization entry,
    and many of those Giants are brighter than humans, right...).

    > A CR 20 stone giant cleric would have... gods, 19 levels of cleric!? I
    > never noticed this before, but going by the monster improvement
    > guidelines, that's what you get!
    >
    > 14 HD of giant. Cleric is a non-associated class since giants get no Clr
    > spellcasting as a racial ability, so first 14 Clr levels each add +1/2
    > to CR, for CR 8 (base stone giant) + 7 (14 * 1/2) = 15. The next 5
    > cleric levels each add +1 and bring the CR up to 20... for a creature
    > with 33 HD and 9th-level spells and stone giant brute strength (Str,
    > natural armour, rock throwing)! Would you rather face this or a human
    > Clr20...?
    >
    > Wacky.

    This has been discussed before. The problem is that it clearly
    should be the first (base) CR levels count 1/2, not the first HD
    levels. Someone had a brain-fart when writting that rule, and AFAIK
    WotC hasn't bothered to fix it yet.

    If you go with the first HD levels then a monster with CR less than
    1/2 HD can actually have a HIGHER class level than their CR, plus
    they still have the monster levels.

    The whole point of the switch to counting full levels rather than
    half levels at some point is that at that point the class levels
    ARE your main schtick, so further class levels are no longer
    unassociated. Obviously this happens at the latest at the point
    where levels from the class alone would give a higher CR than the
    base monster has. So CR makes sense, there is no reason to use
    HD in this calculation other than that that is what the rules say,
    and as you note above it can produce badly broken CR ratings.

    Rule Zero is your friend here.

    DougL
  4. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Justisaur wrote:

    >
    > Werebat wrote:
    >
    >>ephemeralparadox@yahoo.com wrote:
    >>
    >>>I'm curious how everyone feels about creatures with more than one HD
    >>>that have LA. For instance creatures with 1 HD (humans, elves, goblins
    >>>etc) get to start out with a class level and basically a LA of +0. Some
    >>>creatures, planetouched, have 1 HD and an LA of 1 so in a lvl 2 party
    >>>they can have one class lvl and the racial traits make up for being a
    >>>level lower. Now when a player would like to play something unusual,
    >>>i.e. gnoll (2 HD), they have to pay for both monstrous HD and the LA
    >>>(of 1? this is from memory) basically what i am getting to is that HD 1
    >>>creautes get their HD for free while those with HD 2 or more have to
    >>>pay for the free 1 and anything on top of that, perhaps it would be
    >>>more fair to reduce all ECL for monstrous races with more than 1 HD by
    >>>one?
    >>>
    >>>with the gnoll they could not enter play (for convience i'll require
    >>>them to have 1 level of some player class) until the party is level 4
    >>>so a level 1 fighter gnoll would have 3 HD and the racial bonuses. a
    >>>equilivant pc would be a lvl 4 human fighter, they have 4hd and
    >>>signicigantly more feats and hp (4d10 instead of 2d8 + 1d10) My basic
    >>>claim is that the gnoll pc is having to pay for a HD that other players
    >>>get for free. (also to claify the level 1 fighter gnoll would be
    >>>entitled to the same gold pieces worth of equipment as the lvl 4 human
    >>>fighter and progress using the same experience chart, i.e. both need
    >>>4000 xp for the next level)
    >>>i understand the whole LA, ECL, HD thing is a swamp with many
    >>>difficulties, but if would concentrate on the issue of playing a LA
    >>>creature with 2 HD instead of 1 HD i would greatly appreciate it.
    >>>i'm also new here so try not to be a total jerk if i am making a fool
    >>>of myself. thanks
    >>
    >>
    >>One suggestion I have seen here that seems to make some sense is to
    >>allow all creatures, not just the 1-HD ones, to exchange one of their
    >>racial levels for their first class level.
    >>
    >>Thus, humans change their one level of humanoid for their first level of
    >>commoner, aristocrat, fighter, cleric, or whatever.
    >>
    >>Gnolls change one of their two levels of monstrous humanoid for their
    >>first level of warrior, adept, ranger, druid, or whatever.
    >>
    >>The ordinary gnoll with 2 levels of monstrous humanoid and LA could
    >>begin adventuring with 1 level of monstrous humanoid, one level of
    >>Ranger, and LA.
    >>
    >>I think this seems fair and balanced. Also, it makes Nycters more
    >>attractive as a PC race. :^)
    >>
    >
    >
    > Not familiar with Nycters...
    >
    > Anyway it does seem reasonably fair to me as well.
    >
    > I was originally allowing replacing of all monster HD with class
    > levels. Mainly because I wanted some giant clerics that weren't
    > exteremly innefficient (woo. I'm CR 20 now but can cast as a 3rd lv
    > cleric. woo.). I looked at some of the combinations possible though
    > and it was clear that doing that would allow grossly overpowered
    > characters, so I dropped it before anyone took advantage of it.
    >
    > My only concern is that is a Gnoll with 1 HD and 2 levels of ranger (or
    > whatever class they might actually be good at) clearly better than a
    > human with 4 levels of ranger, where a Gnoll with 2 HD, and 1 level of
    > ranger isn't? - unless of course you don't mind slightly overpowered
    > monster PCs. Not sure that I wouldn't, might encourage the players to
    > actually try something different.
    >
    > I'd have to take a fairly close look before allowing this in a typical
    > game though.

    Do you use the Unearthed Arcana rules for buying off LA with XP at
    certain levels?

    Personally I don't think it would make such a huge difference, and yes
    it would encourage people to play more monster PCs. Whether you like
    that or not is your own choice.

    Would I rather play a gnoll humanoid1/ranger4, or a human ranger6? I'd
    clearly rather play the human, from a powergaming perspective. Even if
    I could buy off the LA at 3rd level and play a gnoll humanoid1/ranger5
    or a human ranger6, I'd probably still go with the human if powergaming
    were the only factor.

    - Ron ^*^
  5. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Jasin Zujovic wrote:
    > In article <1118951553.974670.324590@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
    > justisaur@gmail.com says...
    >
    > > I was originally allowing replacing of all monster HD with class
    > > levels. Mainly because I wanted some giant clerics that weren't
    > > exteremly innefficient (woo. I'm CR 20 now but can cast as a 3rd lv
    > > cleric. woo.).
    >
    > As a tangent, are giant clerics (for example) really that inefficient
    > for their CR? For their ECL, quote likely, but CR...?
    >
    > A CR 20 stone giant cleric would have... gods, 19 levels of cleric!? I
    > never noticed this before, but going by the monster improvement
    > guidelines, that's what you get!
    >
    >
    > 14 HD of giant. Cleric is a non-associated class since giants get no Clr
    > spellcasting as a racial ability, so first 14 Clr levels each add +1/2
    > to CR, for CR 8 (base stone giant) + 7 (14 * 1/2) = 15. The next 5
    > cleric levels each add +1 and bring the CR up to 20... for a creature
    > with 33 HD and 9th-level spells and stone giant brute strength (Str,
    > natural armour, rock throwing)! Would you rather face this or a human
    > Clr20...?
    >

    Actually at the time I came up with that I was running 3.0 and they
    didn't have that rule (IIRC). Another reason I dropped that house
    rule.

    I also agree with Doug, the 1/2 CR per level should only apply up to
    base CR not to HD, which would make a CR 20 stone giant be a cleric 16.
    Of course that's still pretty nasty...

    - Justisaur
  6. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Werebat wrote:
    > Justisaur wrote:
    >
    > >
    > > Werebat wrote:
    > >

    > Do you use the Unearthed Arcana rules for buying off LA with XP at
    > certain levels?
    >

    No I haven't implimented anything from UA except allowing paragon
    levels, which no one has used. I'm wondering if I should now that you
    mention it. I did a bit of the basic math, and it doesn't seem like it
    will really make much difference in level progress. If you get up to
    the higher levels it will eventually, but not near when you buy off the
    level. Even if it doesn't really do much it might be a deciding factor
    to a player for the appearance that it's doing something.

    The other issue with it is if you are making a character from scratch
    at a higher level. Did they buy off thier LA at a stage prior to
    joining the game?


    > Would I rather play a gnoll humanoid1/ranger4, or a human ranger6? I'd
    > clearly rather play the human, from a powergaming perspective. Even if
    > I could buy off the LA at 3rd level and play a gnoll humanoid1/ranger5
    > or a human ranger6, I'd probably still go with the human if powergaming
    > were the only factor.
    >

    What about a mind flayer or some such, there are some very nasty things
    you can do with some of the monsters as pcs...

    - Justisaur
  7. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    In article <1118951553.974670.324590@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
    justisaur@gmail.com says...

    > I was originally allowing replacing of all monster HD with class
    > levels. Mainly because I wanted some giant clerics that weren't
    > exteremly innefficient (woo. I'm CR 20 now but can cast as a 3rd lv
    > cleric. woo.).

    As a tangent, are giant clerics (for example) really that inefficient
    for their CR? For their ECL, quote likely, but CR...?

    A CR 20 stone giant cleric would have... gods, 19 levels of cleric!? I
    never noticed this before, but going by the monster improvement
    guidelines, that's what you get!

    14 HD of giant. Cleric is a non-associated class since giants get no Clr
    spellcasting as a racial ability, so first 14 Clr levels each add +1/2
    to CR, for CR 8 (base stone giant) + 7 (14 * 1/2) = 15. The next 5
    cleric levels each add +1 and bring the CR up to 20... for a creature
    with 33 HD and 9th-level spells and stone giant brute strength (Str,
    natural armour, rock throwing)! Would you rather face this or a human
    Clr20...?

    Wacky.


    --
    Jasin Zujovic
    jzujovic@inet.hr
  8. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Jasin Zujovic wrote:
    > In article <1118951553.974670.324590@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
    > justisaur@gmail.com says...
    >
    > > I was originally allowing replacing of all monster HD with class
    > > levels. Mainly because I wanted some giant clerics that weren't
    > > exteremly innefficient (woo. I'm CR 20 now but can cast as a 3rd lv
    > > cleric. woo.).
    >
    > As a tangent, are giant clerics (for example) really that inefficient
    > for their CR? For their ECL, quote likely, but CR...?
    >
    > A CR 20 stone giant cleric would have... gods, 19 levels of cleric!? I
    > never noticed this before, but going by the monster improvement
    > guidelines, that's what you get!

    I've said it before and I'll say it again; book CRs are FUBAR. Just to
    pick one of the sillier examples, a Planetar is CR 16, even though it's
    a 17th level cleric with ridiculously powerful bonuses.

    Laszlo
  9. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Justisaur wrote:
    >
    > Werebat wrote:
    >
    >>Justisaur wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Werebat wrote:
    >>>
    >
    >
    >>Do you use the Unearthed Arcana rules for buying off LA with XP at
    >>certain levels?
    >>
    >
    >
    > No I haven't implimented anything from UA except allowing paragon
    > levels, which no one has used. I'm wondering if I should now that you
    > mention it. I did a bit of the basic math, and it doesn't seem like it
    > will really make much difference in level progress. If you get up to
    > the higher levels it will eventually, but not near when you buy off the
    > level. Even if it doesn't really do much it might be a deciding factor
    > to a player for the appearance that it's doing something.
    >
    > The other issue with it is if you are making a character from scratch
    > at a higher level. Did they buy off thier LA at a stage prior to
    > joining the game?

    I give them the minimum XP they need to be at the standard level for
    entering PCs, then subtract the XP they would have had to have
    sacrificed to lose the LA. So, they do suffer through a lower level for
    a little while.


    >>Would I rather play a gnoll humanoid1/ranger4, or a human ranger6? I'd
    >>clearly rather play the human, from a powergaming perspective. Even if
    >>I could buy off the LA at 3rd level and play a gnoll humanoid1/ranger5
    >>or a human ranger6, I'd probably still go with the human if powergaming
    >>were the only factor.
    >>
    >
    >
    > What about a mind flayer or some such, there are some very nasty things
    > you can do with some of the monsters as pcs...

    True, an ogre mage monk comes to mind... But there are prices to be
    paid for this, in LA and lame monster levels.

    - Ron ^*^
  10. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Symbol wrote:
    > <laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu> wrote in message
    > news:1119004527.604571.35670@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
    > >
    >
    > > I've said it before and I'll say it again; book CRs are FUBAR. Just to
    > > pick one of the sillier examples, a Planetar is CR 16, even though it's
    > > a 17th level cleric with ridiculously powerful bonuses.
    >
    > But they aren't 17th level Clerics. They only have 14HD for a start. They
    > are also *extremely* poorly equipped compared to 17th level characters.

    I tend to think that in most cases the difference between EL
    and CR is that the EL assumes PC equipment.

    I will also note that many of the good creatures appear under
    CRed to me. So Planetar's may well be FUBAR CR. Fortunately
    even when running an evil campaign most hostile encounters
    are with evil creatures.

    DougL
  11. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Rupert Boleyn wrote:
    > On 16 Jun 2005 17:43:32 -0700, "Justisaur" <justisaur@gmail.com>
    > carved upon a tablet of ether:
    >
    > > The other issue with it is if you are making a character from scratch
    > > at a higher level. Did they buy off thier LA at a stage prior to
    > > joining the game?
    >
    > That's another reason to give out a certain amount of XP, rather than
    > a certain level. The primary one being character who want to
    > manufacture their own items, pre-game.
    >
    >

    Good point. Although I allow what the NPCs get which is 70% of cost on
    those items instead.

    To go off on a tangent... What do you do if someone comes into the
    game with a craft skill? It only costs them time and 1/3 of cost of
    items they make in game, so what should they pay for non-magical items
    they are comming in with?

    - Justisaur
  12. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    <laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu> wrote in message
    news:1119004527.604571.35670@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
    >

    > I've said it before and I'll say it again; book CRs are FUBAR. Just to
    > pick one of the sillier examples, a Planetar is CR 16, even though it's
    > a 17th level cleric with ridiculously powerful bonuses.

    But they aren't 17th level Clerics. They only have 14HD for a start. They
    are also *extremely* poorly equipped compared to 17th level characters.
  13. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    On 16 Jun 2005 17:43:32 -0700, "Justisaur" <justisaur@gmail.com>
    carved upon a tablet of ether:

    > The other issue with it is if you are making a character from scratch
    > at a higher level. Did they buy off thier LA at a stage prior to
    > joining the game?

    That's another reason to give out a certain amount of XP, rather than
    a certain level. The primary one being character who want to
    manufacture their own items, pre-game.


    --
    Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
    "Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
    should be free."
  14. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Rupert Boleyn wrote:

    > On 16 Jun 2005 17:43:32 -0700, "Justisaur" <justisaur@gmail.com>
    > carved upon a tablet of ether:
    >
    >
    >>The other issue with it is if you are making a character from scratch
    >>at a higher level. Did they buy off thier LA at a stage prior to
    >>joining the game?
    >
    >
    > That's another reason to give out a certain amount of XP, rather than
    > a certain level. The primary one being character who want to
    > manufacture their own items, pre-game.

    Also a good point.

    - Ron ^*^
  15. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Justisaur wrote:
    > Rupert Boleyn wrote:
    > > On 16 Jun 2005 17:43:32 -0700, "Justisaur" <justisaur@gmail.com>
    > > carved upon a tablet of ether:
    > >
    > > > The other issue with it is if you are making a character from scratch
    > > > at a higher level. Did they buy off thier LA at a stage prior to
    > > > joining the game?
    > >
    > > That's another reason to give out a certain amount of XP, rather than
    > > a certain level. The primary one being character who want to
    > > manufacture their own items, pre-game.
    > >
    > >
    >
    > Good point. Although I allow what the NPCs get which is 70% of cost on
    > those items instead.
    >
    > To go off on a tangent... What do you do if someone comes into the
    > game with a craft skill? It only costs them time and 1/3 of cost of
    > items they make in game, so what should they pay for non-magical items
    > they are comming in with?

    For higher level characters it's in the noise. Baring Fabricate or
    something similar crafting takes too much time to make a difference
    in their income/wealth, and if you give the crafters gear for that
    what about the money the Bard earned playing in bars in the same
    time, and the money the Wizard and Cleric got selling spells?

    If you assume an unlimited demand, or even damand based on the
    local spending limit, a caster can make more money sitting in
    town than he can adventuring, fortunately nothing makes me assume
    unlimited demand, and local casters who the locals KNOW and TRUST
    get that buiseness well before unknown vagabonds from out of town,
    so you are pretty well limited to doing buiseness in places you
    are known.

    For low level characters they can use the skills and abilities in
    "down time", low level characters need good weather to adventure
    safely, so they have many months off per year, and they lack fast
    transport so they are unlikely to have adventures strung togather
    one after another. I rarely have adventures that can't be avoided
    by saying "that's somebody elses problem", so if you want to
    start the campaign with 6 months of "I make lots of arrows" feel
    free.

    I've actually been told by multiple players that I am the ONLY
    DM they have ever seen who tracks seasons of the year or worries
    about weather, I am boggled. Downtime in game is normally quite
    high in my campaigns, make all you want. If you don't have a
    decent source of downtime income those bar bills add up...
    (for a low level character, higher level they are pocket change)
    OTOH an moderate level elite character with an income source
    can clean up relative to expected wealth given a few years,
    fortunately most of my players run adrenaline junkies so they
    don't do this.

    DougL
  16. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Symbol wrote:
    > <laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu> wrote in message
    > news:1119004527.604571.35670@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
    > >
    >
    > > I've said it before and I'll say it again; book CRs are FUBAR. Just to
    > > pick one of the sillier examples, a Planetar is CR 16, even though it's
    > > a 17th level cleric with ridiculously powerful bonuses.
    >
    > But they aren't 17th level Clerics. They only have 14HD for a start.

    Yeah, and +10 Con. That more than evens things out.

    > They are also *extremely* poorly equipped compared to 17th level
    > characters.

    True... but if you compare a Planetar to a 17th level Cleric with Vow
    of Poverty (roughly equivalent in power to a level 17th Cleric without
    the Vow), you'll still find that the Planetar far outstrips the cleric
    in power.

    Laszlo
  17. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    DougL wrote:
    > Justisaur wrote:
    > > Rupert Boleyn wrote:
    > > > On 16 Jun 2005 17:43:32 -0700, "Justisaur" <justisaur@gmail.com>
    > > > carved upon a tablet of ether:
    > > >
    > > > > The other issue with it is if you are making a character from scratch
    > > > > at a higher level. Did they buy off thier LA at a stage prior to
    > > > > joining the game?
    > > >
    > > > That's another reason to give out a certain amount of XP, rather than
    > > > a certain level. The primary one being character who want to
    > > > manufacture their own items, pre-game.
    > > >
    > > >
    > >
    > > Good point. Although I allow what the NPCs get which is 70% of cost on
    > > those items instead.
    > >
    > > To go off on a tangent... What do you do if someone comes into the
    > > game with a craft skill? It only costs them time and 1/3 of cost of
    > > items they make in game, so what should they pay for non-magical items
    > > they are comming in with?
    >
    > For higher level characters it's in the noise. Baring Fabricate or
    > something similar crafting takes too much time to make a difference
    > in their income/wealth, and if you give the crafters gear for that
    > what about the money the Bard earned playing in bars in the same
    > time, and the money the Wizard and Cleric got selling spells?
    >
    > If you assume an unlimited demand, or even damand based on the
    > local spending limit, a caster can make more money sitting in
    > town than he can adventuring, fortunately nothing makes me assume
    > unlimited demand, and local casters who the locals KNOW and TRUST
    > get that buiseness well before unknown vagabonds from out of town,
    > so you are pretty well limited to doing buiseness in places you
    > are known.
    >

    I'm not talking about starting money, that's pretty well set. I'm
    talking about starting gear discounts. I'm also not talking about
    starting at 1st level. I really do think someone that has maxed out a
    craft skill should get some discount on his gear that he could have
    made if you give the discount to magical crafters. I'm not sure that
    even giving it at materials cost isn't a bad idea, might encourage more
    people to be crafters, and it's not as if a whole load of mundane gear
    is going to be all that big a deal. I'd still require them to be able
    to make the rolls for it, or take 10 without penalty.

    > For low level characters they can use the skills and abilities in
    > "down time", low level characters need good weather to adventure
    > safely, so they have many months off per year, and they lack fast
    > transport so they are unlikely to have adventures strung togather
    > one after another. I rarely have adventures that can't be avoided
    > by saying "that's somebody elses problem", so if you want to
    > start the campaign with 6 months of "I make lots of arrows" feel
    > free.
    >

    I've never had a lot of down time in my campains, the players seem too
    intent on following up on practically every single one of the adventure
    hooks I give them.

    Last campain was actually focused a bit on crafting since I started the
    players out with 2 free points in a craft or profession and said they
    were merchants. It still took the barbarian/rogue something like from
    6th to 14th level to complete one item he was working on.

    > I've actually been told by multiple players that I am the ONLY
    > DM they have ever seen who tracks seasons of the year or worries
    > about weather, I am boggled. Downtime in game is normally quite
    > high in my campaigns, make all you want. If you don't have a
    > decent source of downtime income those bar bills add up...
    > (for a low level character, higher level they are pocket change)
    > OTOH an moderate level elite character with an income source
    > can clean up relative to expected wealth given a few years,
    > fortunately most of my players run adrenaline junkies so they
    > don't do this.
    >

    I tracked time, moon phaze, and weather in my last campain, and it
    worked quite well. I found some site that would create a whole year in
    advance, so printed it out and x'd out the days. I had to put in the
    moon phazes myself though. I haven't done that for my current campain
    yet, been a bit too busy.

    - Justisaur
  18. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    On 17 Jun 2005 11:02:36 -0700, "Justisaur" <justisaur@gmail.com>
    carved upon a tablet of ether:

    > To go off on a tangent... What do you do if someone comes into the
    > game with a craft skill? It only costs them time and 1/3 of cost of
    > items they make in game, so what should they pay for non-magical items
    > they are comming in with?

    I just charge cash value. I suppose 70% to be inline with magic items
    would be fair - assume the time spent had an opportunity cost.


    --
    Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
    "Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
    should be free."
  19. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Rupert Boleyn wrote:
    > On 17 Jun 2005 11:02:36 -0700, "Justisaur" <justisaur@gmail.com>
    > carved upon a tablet of ether:
    >
    >
    >>To go off on a tangent... What do you do if someone comes into the
    >>game with a craft skill? It only costs them time and 1/3 of cost of
    >>items they make in game, so what should they pay for non-magical items
    >>they are comming in with?
    >
    >
    > I just charge cash value. I suppose 70% to be inline with magic items
    > would be fair - assume the time spent had an opportunity cost.

    Where is this 70% guideline for magic items? I've always allowed
    incoming characters to buy standard magic items at standard cost, or 50%
    cost plus an xp penalty if they have the appropriate feats and spells to
    make them.

    - Ron ^*^
  20. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    In article <9ZZse.71$up5.42@lakeread02>, Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net> wrote:
    >Rupert Boleyn wrote:
    >> I just charge cash value. I suppose 70% to be inline with magic items
    >> would be fair - assume the time spent had an opportunity cost.
    >
    >Where is this 70% guideline for magic items? I've always allowed
    >incoming characters to buy standard magic items at standard cost, or 50%
    >cost plus an xp penalty if they have the appropriate feats and spells to
    >make them.

    XP is 1/25 GP cost; trade XP for GP at 5:1 means another 1/5 of total cost
    (20%) becomes GP. 50+20=70
    --
    "Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
    http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
  21. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    David Alex Lamb wrote:
    > In article <9ZZse.71$up5.42@lakeread02>, Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net> wrote:
    >
    >>Rupert Boleyn wrote:
    >>
    >>>I just charge cash value. I suppose 70% to be inline with magic items
    >>>would be fair - assume the time spent had an opportunity cost.
    >>
    >>Where is this 70% guideline for magic items? I've always allowed
    >>incoming characters to buy standard magic items at standard cost, or 50%
    >>cost plus an xp penalty if they have the appropriate feats and spells to
    >>make them.
    >
    >
    > XP is 1/25 GP cost; trade XP for GP at 5:1 means another 1/5 of total cost
    > (20%) becomes GP. 50+20=70

    I gotcha. I just have the latecomers pay the xp along with the 50% gp.
    Either way works I guess.

    - Ron ^*^
  22. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Werebat wrote:

    > Where is this 70% guideline for magic items? I've always allowed
    > incoming characters to buy standard magic items at standard cost, or 50%
    > cost plus an xp penalty if they have the appropriate feats and spells to
    > make them.

    By the rules you're right. 70% is the rule given for NPCs.

    Using it for PCs is a common houserule. Someone else has
    already posted the reason why it is 70%.

    DougL
  23. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    On 17 Jun 2005 03:35:27 -0700, laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu scribed into the
    ether:

    >
    >
    >Jasin Zujovic wrote:
    >> In article <1118951553.974670.324590@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
    >> justisaur@gmail.com says...
    >>
    >> > I was originally allowing replacing of all monster HD with class
    >> > levels. Mainly because I wanted some giant clerics that weren't
    >> > exteremly innefficient (woo. I'm CR 20 now but can cast as a 3rd lv
    >> > cleric. woo.).
    >>
    >> As a tangent, are giant clerics (for example) really that inefficient
    >> for their CR? For their ECL, quote likely, but CR...?
    >>
    >> A CR 20 stone giant cleric would have... gods, 19 levels of cleric!? I
    >> never noticed this before, but going by the monster improvement
    >> guidelines, that's what you get!
    >
    >I've said it before and I'll say it again; book CRs are FUBAR. Just to
    >pick one of the sillier examples, a Planetar is CR 16, even though it's
    >a 17th level cleric with ridiculously powerful bonuses.

    Then there are those 5 headed hydras at CR4...
  24. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 13:01:49 +0100, "Symbol" <jb70@talk21.com> scribed into
    the ether:

    >
    ><laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu> wrote in message
    >news:1119004527.604571.35670@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
    >>
    >
    >> I've said it before and I'll say it again; book CRs are FUBAR. Just to
    >> pick one of the sillier examples, a Planetar is CR 16, even though it's
    >> a 17th level cleric with ridiculously powerful bonuses.
    >
    >But they aren't 17th level Clerics. They only have 14HD for a start. They
    >are also *extremely* poorly equipped compared to 17th level characters.

    Hmm, couldn't find Planetars in the 3.5 SRD (Looked under Celestial and
    Planetar, no joy), I guess they aren't open source...so I have to go with
    the 3.0 version.

    I'd rank a Planetar WAAAAAY above a 17th level cleric. Planetars have all
    of a Cleric's spellcasting (and a 23 wisdom to boost it), clerical turn
    undead is pretty useless against the PCs (negating that), better BAB, more
    iterative attacks, dispel magic as an at-will ability, damage reduction,
    regeneration, innate flying....even with the gear that a 17th level cleric
    is going to have, the Planetar is far more formidable.
  25. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Matt Frisch wrote:
    > Symbol scribed into the ether:
    > > laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:
    > > >
    > > > I've said it before and I'll say it again; book CRs are
    > > > FUBAR. Just to pick one of the sillier examples, a
    > > > Planetar is CR 16, even though it's a 17th level cleric
    > > > with ridiculously powerful bonuses.
    > >
    > > But they aren't 17th level Clerics. They only have 14HD
    > > for a start. They are also *extremely* poorly equipped
    > > compared to 17th level characters.
    >
    > Hmm, couldn't find Planetars in the 3.5 SRD (Looked under
    > Celestial and Planetar, no joy), I guess they aren't open
    > source...so I have to go with the 3.0 version.

    They're Angels. They finally portioned out the Celestials like they
    did the Fiends long ago. Devae, Planetar, Solar = Angels. The
    Archons, Guardinals and Eladrin each have their own entry now, too.

    They are open; you could also have found them by searching for the
    text "planetar" on Sovelior's SRD's monsters page:
    http://www.geocities.com/sovelior/srd/monstersAtoZ.html

    I have no particular opinion about the CR, I was just clarifying this
    point.

    --
    Nik
    - remove vermin from email address to reply.
  26. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Matt Frisch wrote:
    > On 17 Jun 2005 03:35:27 -0700, laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu scribed into the
    > ether:
    >
    > >
    > >
    > >Jasin Zujovic wrote:
    > >> In article <1118951553.974670.324590@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
    > >> justisaur@gmail.com says...
    > >>
    > >> > I was originally allowing replacing of all monster HD with class
    > >> > levels. Mainly because I wanted some giant clerics that weren't
    > >> > exteremly innefficient (woo. I'm CR 20 now but can cast as a 3rd lv
    > >> > cleric. woo.).
    > >>
    > >> As a tangent, are giant clerics (for example) really that inefficient
    > >> for their CR? For their ECL, quote likely, but CR...?
    > >>
    > >> A CR 20 stone giant cleric would have... gods, 19 levels of cleric!? I
    > >> never noticed this before, but going by the monster improvement
    > >> guidelines, that's what you get!
    > >
    > >I've said it before and I'll say it again; book CRs are FUBAR. Just to
    > >pick one of the sillier examples, a Planetar is CR 16, even though it's
    > >a 17th level cleric with ridiculously powerful bonuses.
    >
    > Then there are those 5 headed hydras at CR4...

    *chuckle*

    Laszlo
  27. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Symbol wrote:
    > <laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu> wrote in message
    > news:1119093493.326469.7740@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
    > >
    > >
    > > Symbol wrote:
    > > > <laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu> wrote in message
    > > > news:1119004527.604571.35670@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
    > > > >
    > > >
    > > > > I've said it before and I'll say it again; book CRs are FUBAR. Just
    > to
    > > > > pick one of the sillier examples, a Planetar is CR 16, even though
    > it's
    > > > > a 17th level cleric with ridiculously powerful bonuses.
    > > >
    > > > But they aren't 17th level Clerics. They only have 14HD for a start.
    > >
    > > Yeah, and +10 Con. That more than evens things out.
    >
    > HD does more than set HP. It so happens that outsider HD are very good but
    > that's beside the point.

    I'm not sure it _is_ beside the point. HD does give other bonuses, but
    a Planetar happens to be superior at all of them. The one exception I
    can think of is Unholy Word, which is only interested in the target's
    HD, nothing else (a singularly poor mechanic, IMO, as it screws over
    high-LA races for no thematic reason). But that's certainly not enough
    to balance the Planetar, IMO.

    > > > They are also *extremely* poorly equipped compared to 17th level
    > > > characters.
    > >
    > > True... but if you compare a Planetar to a 17th level Cleric with Vow
    > > of Poverty (roughly equivalent in power to a level 17th Cleric without
    > > the Vow), you'll still find that the Planetar far outstrips the cleric
    > > in power.
    >
    > I don't have the BoED so I don't even know if the vow actually balances
    > power against possessions.

    Fair enough. It's actually acceptably balanced for most classes. For
    equipment-heavy classes, it's slightly underpowered, and for classes
    that don't need as much equipment (Druids, most notably), it's
    overpowered, but overall, it seems to be okay-ish.

    Laszlo
  28. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Symbol wrote:
    > "Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
    > news:se5cb1h5sv6qrdpokshvvln1ch1mtpv181@4ax.com...
    > > I'd rank a Planetar WAAAAAY above a 17th level cleric. Planetars have
    > all
    > > of a Cleric's spellcasting (and a 23 wisdom to boost it),
    >
    > I can't remember the last time I saw a 17th level Cleric with a wisdom
    > that low...

    That's because you're used to overpowered PCs (most of us are).

    Remember that most PCs have starting abilities well above the Elite
    Array (15,14,13,12,10,8), and as such, should be considered to be
    higher CR than their level.

    A level 17 Cleric should only be considered CR 17 (by the RAW) if his
    starting Wisdom is 15. This would make his Wisdom 19 by level 17
    (assuming he put all his level-up points into Wisdom), and he could
    expect to have a Wisdom of 25 with a +6 phylactery.

    Meanwhile, the Planetar would use the nonelite array. If this
    particular Planetar thought spellcasting important, he would also have
    a Wisdom of 25 or 26 (from putting his 12 or 13 in Wisdom).

    > > clerical turn
    > > undead is pretty useless against the PCs (negating that), better BAB,
    > more
    > > iterative attacks, dispel magic as an at-will ability, damage reduction,
    > > regeneration, innate flying....even with the gear that a 17th level
    > cleric
    > > is going to have, the Planetar is far more formidable.
    >
    > Without wanting to work out a suitable list of items and see what you can
    > afford I'm not going to completely disagree. Dispel Magic would be a
    > wasted action (far more often than not) against a 17th level caster and
    > none of those other things seem particularly expensive to reproduce.

    Matt didn't mention the SR 30, which is formidable protection at any
    non-epic level.

    But I agree, it's rather difficult to compare the two, because bringing
    items into the equation introduces too many variables. Which is why I
    suggested a Vow of Poverty cleric for comparison.

    Laszlo
  29. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Symbol wrote:
    > <laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu> wrote in message
    > news:1119263562.019210.151700@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
    > >
    > >
    > > > I don't have the BoED so I don't even know if the vow actually
    > balances
    > > > power against possessions.
    > >
    > > Fair enough. It's actually acceptably balanced for most classes. For
    > > equipment-heavy classes, it's slightly underpowered, and for classes
    > > that don't need as much equipment (Druids, most notably), it's
    > > overpowered, but overall, it seems to be okay-ish.
    >
    > Presumably there is a constant undervalue due to the fact that you can
    > never lose your equipment though?

    Sure, that makes sense.

    Laszlo
  30. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    <laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu> wrote in message
    news:1119093493.326469.7740@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
    >
    >
    > Symbol wrote:
    > > <laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu> wrote in message
    > > news:1119004527.604571.35670@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
    > > >
    > >
    > > > I've said it before and I'll say it again; book CRs are FUBAR. Just
    to
    > > > pick one of the sillier examples, a Planetar is CR 16, even though
    it's
    > > > a 17th level cleric with ridiculously powerful bonuses.
    > >
    > > But they aren't 17th level Clerics. They only have 14HD for a start.
    >
    > Yeah, and +10 Con. That more than evens things out.

    HD does more than set HP. It so happens that outsider HD are very good but
    that's beside the point.

    > > They are also *extremely* poorly equipped compared to 17th level
    > > characters.
    >
    > True... but if you compare a Planetar to a 17th level Cleric with Vow
    > of Poverty (roughly equivalent in power to a level 17th Cleric without
    > the Vow), you'll still find that the Planetar far outstrips the cleric
    > in power.

    I don't have the BoED so I don't even know if the vow actually balances
    power against possessions.
  31. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
    news:se5cb1h5sv6qrdpokshvvln1ch1mtpv181@4ax.com...
    > On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 13:01:49 +0100, "Symbol" <jb70@talk21.com> scribed
    into
    > the ether:
    >
    > >
    > ><laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu> wrote in message
    > >news:1119004527.604571.35670@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
    > >>
    > >
    > >> I've said it before and I'll say it again; book CRs are FUBAR. Just
    to
    > >> pick one of the sillier examples, a Planetar is CR 16, even though
    it's
    > >> a 17th level cleric with ridiculously powerful bonuses.
    > >
    > >But they aren't 17th level Clerics. They only have 14HD for a start.
    They
    > >are also *extremely* poorly equipped compared to 17th level characters.
    >
    > Hmm, couldn't find Planetars in the 3.5 SRD (Looked under Celestial and
    > Planetar, no joy), I guess they aren't open source...so I have to go
    with
    > the 3.0 version.

    As Nik says they are under "Angel".

    http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/angel.htm#angelPlanetar

    > I'd rank a Planetar WAAAAAY above a 17th level cleric. Planetars have
    all
    > of a Cleric's spellcasting (and a 23 wisdom to boost it),

    I can't remember the last time I saw a 17th level Cleric with a wisdom
    that low...

    > clerical turn
    > undead is pretty useless against the PCs (negating that), better BAB,
    more
    > iterative attacks, dispel magic as an at-will ability, damage reduction,
    > regeneration, innate flying....even with the gear that a 17th level
    cleric
    > is going to have, the Planetar is far more formidable.

    Without wanting to work out a suitable list of items and see what you can
    afford I'm not going to completely disagree. Dispel Magic would be a
    wasted action (far more often than not) against a 17th level caster and
    none of those other things seem particularly expensive to reproduce.
  32. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:
    > Symbol wrote:
    > > "Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
    > > news:se5cb1h5sv6qrdpokshvvln1ch1mtpv181@4ax.com...
    > > > I'd rank a Planetar WAAAAAY above a 17th level cleric. Planetars have
    > > all
    > > > of a Cleric's spellcasting (and a 23 wisdom to boost it),
    > >
    > > I can't remember the last time I saw a 17th level Cleric with a wisdom
    > > that low...

    True for both PCs and hand built NPCs on 25 points IME.

    A primary caster will normally have a high enough score in
    his primary ability to get a bonus spell of the highest
    available level.

    > That's because you're used to overpowered PCs (most of us are).
    >
    > Remember that most PCs have starting abilities well above the Elite
    > Array (15,14,13,12,10,8), and as such, should be considered to be
    > higher CR than their level.
    >
    > A level 17 Cleric should only be considered CR 17 (by the RAW) if his
    > starting Wisdom is 15. This would make his Wisdom 19 by level 17
    > (assuming he put all his level-up points into Wisdom), and he could
    > expect to have a Wisdom of 25 with a +6 phylactery.
    >
    > Meanwhile, the Planetar would use the nonelite array. If this
    > particular Planetar thought spellcasting important, he would also have
    > a Wisdom of 25 or 26 (from putting his 12 or 13 in Wisdom).

    Wrong. He puts the 13 in and adds the +12 mod for a 23 base value
    and gets 25, he puts the +12 in and he gets 24.

    If you are going to build nonstandard monsters DO IT RIGHT! The
    racial mod is an even number.

    DougL
  33. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    <laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu> wrote in message
    news:1119263562.019210.151700@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
    >
    >
    > Symbol wrote:
    > > <laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu> wrote in message
    > > news:1119093493.326469.7740@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Symbol wrote:
    > > > > <laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu> wrote in message
    > > > > news:1119004527.604571.35670@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
    > > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > > I've said it before and I'll say it again; book CRs are FUBAR.
    Just
    > > to
    > > > > > pick one of the sillier examples, a Planetar is CR 16, even
    though
    > > it's
    > > > > > a 17th level cleric with ridiculously powerful bonuses.
    > > > >
    > > > > But they aren't 17th level Clerics. They only have 14HD for a
    start.
    > > >
    > > > Yeah, and +10 Con. That more than evens things out.
    > >
    > > HD does more than set HP. It so happens that outsider HD are very good
    but
    > > that's beside the point.
    >
    > I'm not sure it _is_ beside the point. HD does give other bonuses, but
    > a Planetar happens to be superior at all of them. The one exception I
    > can think of is Unholy Word, which is only interested in the target's
    > HD, nothing else (a singularly poor mechanic, IMO, as it screws over
    > high-LA races for no thematic reason). But that's certainly not enough
    > to balance the Planetar, IMO.

    Possibly but unless they are on their home plane an unholy word would
    banish a planetar in any case, regardless of HD. There are quite a few
    effects that vary with the HD of a target. I don't know how many of those
    matter between 14HD and 17HD though.

    > > > > They are also *extremely* poorly equipped compared to 17th level
    > > > > characters.
    > > >
    > > > True... but if you compare a Planetar to a 17th level Cleric with
    Vow
    > > > of Poverty (roughly equivalent in power to a level 17th Cleric
    without
    > > > the Vow), you'll still find that the Planetar far outstrips the
    cleric
    > > > in power.
    > >
    > > I don't have the BoED so I don't even know if the vow actually
    balances
    > > power against possessions.
    >
    > Fair enough. It's actually acceptably balanced for most classes. For
    > equipment-heavy classes, it's slightly underpowered, and for classes
    > that don't need as much equipment (Druids, most notably), it's
    > overpowered, but overall, it seems to be okay-ish.

    Presumably there is a constant undervalue due to the fact that you can
    never lose your equipment though?
  34. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    <laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu> wrote in message
    news:1119264300.921152.160460@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
    >
    >
    > Symbol wrote:
    > > "Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
    > > news:se5cb1h5sv6qrdpokshvvln1ch1mtpv181@4ax.com...
    > > > I'd rank a Planetar WAAAAAY above a 17th level cleric. Planetars
    have
    > > all
    > > > of a Cleric's spellcasting (and a 23 wisdom to boost it),
    > >
    > > I can't remember the last time I saw a 17th level Cleric with a wisdom
    > > that low...
    >
    > That's because you're used to overpowered PCs (most of us are).
    >
    > Remember that most PCs have starting abilities well above the Elite
    > Array (15,14,13,12,10,8), and as such, should be considered to be
    > higher CR than their level.

    That's 25 point buy and we used that for a while. More like 28 or 32 these
    days. You could argue that 32 points warrants a +1CR but not 28.

    > A level 17 Cleric should only be considered CR 17 (by the RAW) if his
    > starting Wisdom is 15. This would make his Wisdom 19 by level 17
    > (assuming he put all his level-up points into Wisdom), and he could
    > expect to have a Wisdom of 25 with a +6 phylactery.

    There are other ways to boost wisdom too. You can spend money on wishes,
    or a tome of understanding. That's free money compared to the planetar and
    that same Cleric could have a Wisdom 30 for about 60% of his expected
    wealth.

    > > Without wanting to work out a suitable list of items and see what you
    can
    > > afford I'm not going to completely disagree. Dispel Magic would be a
    > > wasted action (far more often than not) against a 17th level caster
    and
    > > none of those other things seem particularly expensive to reproduce.
    >
    > Matt didn't mention the SR 30, which is formidable protection at any
    > non-epic level.

    True.

    > But I agree, it's rather difficult to compare the two, because bringing
    > items into the equation introduces too many variables. Which is why I
    > suggested a Vow of Poverty cleric for comparison.

    Yeah, but not something I can do unfortunately.
  35. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    On 20 Jun 2005 03:45:00 -0700, laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu carved upon
    a tablet of ether:

    > Matt didn't mention the SR 30, which is formidable protection at any
    > non-epic level.

    Vs a 17th level caster who specialises in offensive magic (a fair bet
    if they're casting attack spells at something like a planetar) that's
    a nice protection, but hardly formidable - they will have Greater
    Spell Penetration, and thus need 9+ to penetrate, a 60% chance. Also,
    most conjurations get to ignore it. That said, given their SR, DR,
    resistances, and immunities, plus 17th level spellcasting, they are
    certainly a tough monster. I suspect if you bumped into one unprepared
    they'd seem rather worse than CR16, but that if properly prepared
    their low HD would make them seem weak, especially given their poor
    touch AC (before they can buff themselves, of course).


    --
    Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
    "Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
    should be free."
  36. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Werebat wrote:
    > Justisaur wrote:
    > >
    > > Werebat wrote:
    > >
    > >>Justisaur wrote:
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>>Werebat wrote:
    > >>>
    > >
    > >
    > >>Do you use the Unearthed Arcana rules for buying off LA with XP at
    > >>certain levels?
    > >>
    > > No I haven't implimented anything from UA except allowing paragon
    > > levels, which no one has used. I'm wondering if I should now that you
    > > mention it. I did a bit of the basic math, and it doesn't seem like it
    > > will really make much difference in level progress. If you get up to
    > > the higher levels it will eventually, but not near when you buy off the
    > > level. Even if it doesn't really do much it might be a deciding factor
    > > to a player for the appearance that it's doing something.
    > >
    > > The other issue with it is if you are making a character from scratch
    > > at a higher level. Did they buy off thier LA at a stage prior to
    > > joining the game?
    >
    > I give them the minimum XP they need to be at the standard level for
    > entering PCs, then subtract the XP they would have had to have
    > sacrificed to lose the LA. So, they do suffer through a lower level for
    > a little while.
    >
    >
    > >>Would I rather play a gnoll humanoid1/ranger4, or a human ranger6? I'd
    > >>clearly rather play the human, from a powergaming perspective. Even if
    > >>I could buy off the LA at 3rd level and play a gnoll humanoid1/ranger5
    > >>or a human ranger6, I'd probably still go with the human if powergaming
    > >>were the only factor.
    > >>
    > >
    > >
    > > What about a mind flayer or some such, there are some very nasty things
    > > you can do with some of the monsters as pcs...
    >
    > True, an ogre mage monk comes to mind... But there are prices to be
    > paid for this, in LA and lame monster levels.
    >

    Well once you get rid of the LA, and the character has caught up in xp,
    all you have are the "lame" monster hd, but you still get feats and
    skills and hp for those, and you get all the monster abilites & stats
    which may more than make up for those. Then there's outsider HD. I'd
    hardly call those lame, you get one of the main attratctions of monk,
    all good saves.

    It just seems dangerous to me. I'd have to look over the possible
    abuses very carefully before allowing it.

    - Justisaur
  37. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:
    > Symbol wrote:
    > > "Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
    > > news:se5cb1h5sv6qrdpokshvvln1ch1mtpv181@4ax.com...
    > > > I'd rank a Planetar WAAAAAY above a 17th level cleric. Planetars have
    > > all
    > > > of a Cleric's spellcasting (and a 23 wisdom to boost it),
    > >
    > > I can't remember the last time I saw a 17th level Cleric with a wisdom
    > > that low...
    >
    > That's because you're used to overpowered PCs (most of us are).
    >
    > Remember that most PCs have starting abilities well above the Elite
    > Array (15,14,13,12,10,8), and as such, should be considered to be
    > higher CR than their level.
    >
    > A level 17 Cleric should only be considered CR 17 (by the RAW) if his
    > starting Wisdom is 15. This would make his Wisdom 19 by level 17
    > (assuming he put all his level-up points into Wisdom), and he could
    > expect to have a Wisdom of 25 with a +6 phylactery.
    >
    > Meanwhile, the Planetar would use the nonelite array. If this
    > particular Planetar thought spellcasting important, he would also have
    > a Wisdom of 25 or 26 (from putting his 12 or 13 in Wisdom).
    >
    > > > clerical turn
    > > > undead is pretty useless against the PCs (negating that), better BAB,
    > > more
    > > > iterative attacks, dispel magic as an at-will ability, damage reduction,
    > > > regeneration, innate flying....even with the gear that a 17th level
    > > cleric
    > > > is going to have, the Planetar is far more formidable.
    > >
    > > Without wanting to work out a suitable list of items and see what you can
    > > afford I'm not going to completely disagree. Dispel Magic would be a
    > > wasted action (far more often than not) against a 17th level caster and
    > > none of those other things seem particularly expensive to reproduce.
    >
    > Matt didn't mention the SR 30, which is formidable protection at any
    > non-epic level.
    >
    > But I agree, it's rather difficult to compare the two, because bringing
    > items into the equation introduces too many variables. Which is why I
    > suggested a Vow of Poverty cleric for comparison.
    >

    You could just use the NPC cleric listed in the DMG, it has equipment
    factored in, and is a CR 17 being an NPC.

    - Justisaur
  38. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    On 20 Jun 2005 10:25:41 -0700, "DougL" <doug.lampert@tdytsi.com>
    carved upon a tablet of ether:

    > > Meanwhile, the Planetar would use the nonelite array. If this
    > > particular Planetar thought spellcasting important, he would also have
    > > a Wisdom of 25 or 26 (from putting his 12 or 13 in Wisdom).
    >
    > Wrong. He puts the 13 in and adds the +12 mod for a 23 base value
    > and gets 25, he puts the +12 in and he gets 24.
    >
    > If you are going to build nonstandard monsters DO IT RIGHT! The
    > racial mod is an even number.

    As a 14HD creature it gets three stat advancements. Thus Wis12 + 12 +
    3 = Wis27 and Wis13 + 12 + 3 = Wis28.


    --
    Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
    "Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
    should be free."
  39. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Rupert Boleyn wrote:
    > On 20 Jun 2005 10:25:41 -0700, "DougL" <doug.lampert@tdytsi.com>
    > carved upon a tablet of ether:
    >
    > > > Meanwhile, the Planetar would use the nonelite array. If this
    > > > particular Planetar thought spellcasting important, he would also have
    > > > a Wisdom of 25 or 26 (from putting his 12 or 13 in Wisdom).
    > >
    > > Wrong. He puts the 13 in and adds the +12 mod for a 23 base value
    > > and gets 25, he puts the +12 in and he gets 24.
    > >
    > > If you are going to build nonstandard monsters DO IT RIGHT! The
    > > racial mod is an even number.
    >
    > As a 14HD creature it gets three stat advancements. Thus Wis12 + 12 +
    > 3 = Wis27 and Wis13 + 12 + 3 = Wis28.

    Stat advances for MM stat block base HD are EXPLICITLY already included
    in the listed abilities.

    Check the chapter on monster advancement.

    GET THE RULES RIGHT!

    DougL
  40. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Matt Frisch wrote:
    > On 17 Jun 2005 03:35:27 -0700, laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu scribed into the
    > ether:
    >>I've said it before and I'll say it again; book CRs are FUBAR. Just to
    >>pick one of the sillier examples, a Planetar is CR 16, even though it's
    >>a 17th level cleric with ridiculously powerful bonuses.
    > Then there are those 5 headed hydras at CR4...

    Are they flying grapplers as well?
    --
    "... respect, all good works are not done by only good folk. For within these Trials, we
    shall do what needs to be done."
    --till next time, Jameson Stalanthas Yu -x- <<poetry.dolphins-cove.com>>
  41. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 16:07:31 -0700, ~consul
    <consul@INVALIDdolphins-cove.com> scribed into the ether:

    >Matt Frisch wrote:
    >> On 17 Jun 2005 03:35:27 -0700, laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu scribed into the
    >> ether:
    >>>I've said it before and I'll say it again; book CRs are FUBAR. Just to
    >>>pick one of the sillier examples, a Planetar is CR 16, even though it's
    >>>a 17th level cleric with ridiculously powerful bonuses.
    >> Then there are those 5 headed hydras at CR4...
    >
    >Are they flying grapplers as well?

    Yes. I hear they have an alignment too. And are nazis.
  42. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Werebat" <ranpoirier@cox.net> wrote in message
    news:cK6se.16497$Hj.10596@lakeread02...
    >
    >
    > ephemeralparadox@yahoo.com wrote:
    >> I'm curious how everyone feels about creatures with more than one HD
    >> that have LA. For instance creatures with 1 HD (humans, elves, goblins
    >> etc) get to start out with a class level and basically a LA of +0. Some
    >> creatures, planetouched, have 1 HD and an LA of 1 so in a lvl 2 party
    >> they can have one class lvl and the racial traits make up for being a
    >> level lower. Now when a player would like to play something unusual,
    >> i.e. gnoll (2 HD), they have to pay for both monstrous HD and the LA
    >> (of 1? this is from memory) basically what i am getting to is that HD 1
    >> creautes get their HD for free while those with HD 2 or more have to
    >> pay for the free 1 and anything on top of that, perhaps it would be
    >> more fair to reduce all ECL for monstrous races with more than 1 HD by
    >> one?
    >>
    >> with the gnoll they could not enter play (for convience i'll require
    >> them to have 1 level of some player class) until the party is level 4
    >> so a level 1 fighter gnoll would have 3 HD and the racial bonuses. a
    >> equilivant pc would be a lvl 4 human fighter, they have 4hd and
    >> signicigantly more feats and hp (4d10 instead of 2d8 + 1d10) My basic
    >> claim is that the gnoll pc is having to pay for a HD that other players
    >> get for free. (also to claify the level 1 fighter gnoll would be
    >> entitled to the same gold pieces worth of equipment as the lvl 4 human
    >> fighter and progress using the same experience chart, i.e. both need
    >> 4000 xp for the next level)
    >> i understand the whole LA, ECL, HD thing is a swamp with many
    >> difficulties, but if would concentrate on the issue of playing a LA
    >> creature with 2 HD instead of 1 HD i would greatly appreciate it.
    >> i'm also new here so try not to be a total jerk if i am making a fool
    >> of myself. thanks
    >
    >
    > One suggestion I have seen here that seems to make some sense is to allow
    > all creatures, not just the 1-HD ones, to exchange one of their racial
    > levels for their first class level.

    I am wholeheartedly in agreement with this.

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
  43. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote in
    news:U4GdnYXzCZ4Ib3LfRVn-sw@comcast.com:

    >
    > "Werebat" <ranpoirier@cox.net> wrote in message
    > news:cK6se.16497$Hj.10596@lakeread02...

    >> One suggestion I have seen here that seems to make some sense is to
    >> allow all creatures, not just the 1-HD ones, to exchange one of their
    >> racial levels for their first class level.
    >
    > I am wholeheartedly in agreement with this.
    >

    The other direction that I'd consider, which would require a larger
    overhaul, is that all creatures have racial HD. A generic human is a 1-HD
    creature, while a human with class levels is a 1+X HD creature. Maybe not
    for D&D, but I think it would be more consistent, and something to consider
    if you're cooking up a new D20 system.
Ask a new question

Read More

Games HD Video Games