Are high ECL races worth it?

[Zerovoid]

I really don't like the current ECL system. The rules on monster PC's in the DMG were just wierd, and while the rules in the FRCS are more consistent, I find them equally problematic.

Take Drow for example. They are ECL +2, so you can have a 1st level drow when you could have a 3rd level character of another race. Now, even with the drows spell like abilities, having only one hit die is a real weakness at this level, and you might easily die. I think its pretty obvious that a 1st level drow has alot less survivability than a standard 3rd level PC. But, will this pay off in the long run? I'm not sure. The drow's SR of 11 + class level is pretty good, but remember that they are two levels behind. They get a net +4 to stats, which can be really good, especially with point buy, but is it worth two levels? I don't think so for a spellcaster, just like multiclassing is a bad idea, and a fighter will really miss the hit points and BAB. Even a Rogue has his skillpoint cap lowered vs his party mates.

I would much rather that all powerful races were treated as multi-hit dice monsters. If drows really kick so much butt, then make them 3 hit dice warriors as a base or something. The idea would be that these levels of the "drow" class should be equal to any other class levels. Class levels would just be multiclassed on as normal.

Note that drow are just one example. I had a cool character background for a drow, but decided not to play one because the level hit was too severe. I think Tieflings are even worse. A net +2 to stats, and Darkness 1/day don't come close to equalling the level you lose. Half Dragon might pay off for fighters, but in general, the sacrifice doesn't seem worth it.

 

[Wolfspider]

I dunno

I dunno...I think the coolness factor is worth it. Plus, I don't think I'd start a special character like that off at 1st level. I think they're more suited to higher level campaigns, whether you're starting the characters off at that level or introducing a new character into the mix. They tend to have more survivability that way.

Oh, by the way, did anyone notice that "ECL" isn't the correct technical term anymore? In the latest Dragon magazine, they use the term "Level Adjustment" (or LA) when describing the saurial race.

Much simpler, I think.

 

[Crothian]

I like it cause it makes people think twice about playing a more powerful race. But you are right, I don't think it's very balanced at early levels. If it was intended for a higher level group, one would think WotC would have mentioned that smewhere. Many people I know stick with characters through the whole campaign, so the only way they ever start a character is at level one.

For the ECL+1 races do you think it would be fair to start them off as a 0 level character using the rules in the DMG? THis would be instead of the normal rules. I haven't seen a +1 race that was really worth the cost. But then we don't use them in out games. It's by choice, most of those races are a little to odd for us.

 

[Amrynn Moonshadow]

I think it is balanced, personally. I think we all learned from 2e that things can get a bit out of hand when you use a race that has innate abilities . . .

Bob the human: "hey, i used to be a farmer, and now i'm an adventurer, look at me swing this wooden pole to and fro . . . see . . . see . . . i have astounding skill"

Zak'hak'enaq the Drow: "i do agree that it is impressive, but watch me encase you in darkness with my own special abilities, and levitate while i fireball you."

Mungdegoomor, the planetouch: "har har har . . . your puny fireball is no match for Mungdegoomor, son of fire!"

Bob the human: " eep . "

Additionally, i've never had the chance to play one from 1st level, and only use them as NPC's occasionally. (if party level is around 6th level, if they face a drow he'll be 6th level (+2 due to being a drow), so he'll be better, and they will learn to fear them, but if they want to play them, they will be a bit behind everyone else).

They were all monsters back in the day, so I still use them as creatures that are on the DM's side, instead of standard races. personally these extra special characters are hardly ever around anyway . . . it's not like you bump into them everyday. (what's next? segregated schools because the aasimar's and tiefling gangs always fought?)

I think it is worth it, from a mechanics standpoint, and as a DM, i get to tinker with the mechanics . . . so it's all good for me.

 

[Paragon]

I think it helps make them rare. which is what many of them are supposed to be.

Paragon

 

[William Ronald]

Making the more powerful ECL or LA races rare is generally good. Such characters tend to stand out, and pretty much call for interesting stories. Plus it causes people to have to think of a reason why a svirfneblin, an aasimar, and a drow are adventuring together.

 

[MythandLore]

A deep gnome that's frist level in a group of 4th level characters would be at a huge disadvantage.
A 4th level Human Wiz could have more HP then the 1st level DG even if he was barbarian.

I'm one of the people that does think the +ECL can be to much of a drawback, I think this could be ofset a little by giving bonus HP.
Races that already get HP should not get extra HP.
+1 ECL +2HP
+2 ECL +4HP
+3 ECL +6HP
Now the level loss doen't seem SO huge.
Normally there's no way i'd take a +ECL race.

 

[Rashak Mani]

In higher levels Drow is very worthwhile ... except of course for spellcasters in general...

Imagine 13th lvl Rogue ... good... now is he so much better than an 11th lvl Drow Rogue ? This drow has 11+lvl (22!!) SR... some nifty darkness and stuff... better dex. 120 infravision !

At these levels the difference of 2 lvls isnt so dramatic.... but Spell Resistance is.

Half Celestials for example will give you +4 constitution. Thats an extra 2 hps per level. Even at ECL +3 on the long run you will compensate those lost HPs and get much much better Stats and immunity to a host of energy attacks. Your lost Base Attack Bonus will be compensated by +4 Str !! Even a Fighter will lose only a +1 BAB. + fly

Low to medium levels is another story of course... Aasimar seems worthwhile for Paladins and Thieflings for Rogues. +2 is a hefty price thou for most PCs.

I agree with you that it is a heavy price... in general most players will shy away... which is the intention I suppose. Avoid groups full of Drows and Minotaurs. The player who really wants to play an alternate race wont mind as much... and a nice DM can compensate somewhat if he judges that the penalty is excessive.

( I dont believe in roleplaying penalties. That you should get a lot of extra goodies for Drow because they are a discriminated race... the price should be payed mechanic wise. )

 

[Jack Daniel]

ELC races are only worth it inasmuch as you make up for the lost HP due to missing levels. If it has monster hit dice or a high CON bonus, great, but barring that, I would't go above ECL + 3.

 

[graydoom]

Luckily, many races with high ECLs also have monster HD. The real weak point is the races with moderate/high ECLs but few HD (like drow).

I find that for ECLs, it is better to either have a low ECL and use a race with no monster HD, or to use just play race that does have monster HD. With monster HD, the ECL doesn't hurt anywhere near as much.