Aasimar/Tiefling 1st Level Character

[IcyCool]

This is probably not what IcyCool meant, but I feel compelled to argue with this point. LA does give you something ... you do get the racial traits - such as the aforementioned ability to cast darkness, etc. That's what the LA is there for - to balance out the effective add-ons that come with playing one of those characters. Now, I will agree with many who said LAs are balanced at lower levels but at higher levels they really hamper a character if more than +1.

Fair point. I was just attempting to explain it very simply.

 

[Kobold Stew]

For example ...this may seem strange to many of you ... but take the 3.5 hobgoblin. Essentially the hobgoblin gets a +1 for:

+2 DEX, +2 CON
+4 on Move Silently checks
Darkvision.

This is a common way of reckoning things, but I think it is flawed. The truth of the matter puts the LA in an even worse light, and shows the comparative weakness of the LA + 1 races.

("Weakness": I am not suggesting house ruling a fix, but it is important that the costs are clear. Hobgoblins are a weak choice; Gnolls are weaker still. But people who choose these races IMO should want the handicap for whatever reason, and not try to wash it away with a house rule.)

Back on track:

the hobgoblin gets a +1 for:

+2 DEX, +2 CON
+4 on Move Silently checks
Darkvision
-1 feat at first level
-1 skill point per level, with -4 skill points at first level.

This is the true cost of the LA + 1, because if one were not a hobgoblin, one would be another race (and each race has its own checks and balances). The hobgoblin LOSES the benefits of being human.

Similar factors must be incorporated into costing out the LA + 1 from the planetouched races. They are probably worth it, for most players. But when making the calculation it is necessary to factor in

-1 feat at first level
-1 skill point per level, with -4 skill points at first level.

That is the cost of an LA race.

 

[vulcan_idic]

Isn't there a 0-level class house rule presented somewhere? Maybe that could be used?

 

[Kobold Stew]

Isn't there a 0-level class house rule presented somewhere? Maybe that could be used?

That's the Savage Progressions" article mentioned.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sp/20040213a

It's as unbalanced ("broken") as the day is long, in that any spell caster should take it if they can.

KS

 

[Nonlethal Force]

This is the true cost of the LA + 1, because if one were not a hobgoblin, one would be another race (and each race has its own checks and balances). The hobgoblin LOSES the benefits of being human.

This is really a moot argument, though. Because the same is true for all races. If you choose elf you loose the feat and the skillpoints, too. You gain immunity to sleep, bonuses against enchantments, lowlight vision, elven weapons, listen/spot/search check bonues, and a bonus elven language.

If you choose halfling, you lose the feat and the skill points for a small AC/attack boost, the pluses to move silently, the pluses to saves, the pluses with thrown weapons, etc...

And I could go on and on for every race.

The point is ... your argument just takes it from a different frame of reference. What I was saying is that if you want to choose a human, you gain a feat and 4 skillpoints without an LA adjustment. If you want to choose a hobgoblin you gan gain a boost to two stats (with no negatives) darkvision, and the move silently bonus for an LA adjustment of +1. -OR- I allow my players to take a boost to one stat and a negative to the other (which balances each other out) and giving a +4 to move silently and darkvision. So, essentially, you are trading and extra skillpoint per level and a feat for darkvision and the +4 for move silently.

And if you actually read my words, you will see that I cleraly admit that it makes the hobgoblin a little underpowered. But most of my players that want the hobgoblin play it for style - not because they care about powergaming anyway.

But really it is just a frame of reference. You could use the elf as the base, or the dwarf, or the gnome, or ... well ... you get my point.

 

[vulcan_idic]

That's the Savage Progressions" article mentioned.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sp/20040213a

It's as unbalanced ("broken") as the day is long, in that any spell caster should take it if they can.

KS

OK, but that's not at all what I meant. What I was talking about what something I thought I read about somewhere of 0-level character classes... i.e. so you could start playing a pre-first level *human* character. The recommended usage was so you could play a group of characters who were quite young... just taking their finals from wizard school or something. An interesting idea, but I haven't used it yet. Or maybe it was so you could start as both of two classes you were planning on multiclassing as...

Anyway, it seems like that could work here. The LA +1 being the main level and just having the barest sketch of the class that will be there. Then the second level would be the full first level of the character class.

Edit: I skimmed those racial levels in the linked article and I really don't see where the brokenness comes in. Especially for spellcasters - you still loose the caster levels, it looks just as balanced as starting at second level as a 1st level character of an LA +1 race, just having the benefits split up a bit so you can advance with other characters. Sorry, I just don't see it.

 

[Baron Opal]

For most LA +1 races, I just charge a feat and call it good. Of the asamaar, tiefling and gensai I don't think there is a race that is that good that costing the first level feat is too good a deal.

 

[Kobold Stew]

This is really a moot argument, though. Because the same is true for all races. If you choose elf you loose the feat and the skillpoints, too. You gain immunity to sleep, bonuses against enchantments, lowlight vision, elven weapons, listen/spot/search check bonues, and a bonus elven language.


<snip>

But really it is just a frame of reference. You could use the elf as the base, or the dwarf, or the gnome, or ... well ... you get my point.

Sure, you could use any race as a point of reference, but that does nothing to make the point moot.

Whatever you use as the base (I happened to choose one of the LA + 0 races that had no change in stats because it is simplest to see), the fact that you lose the benefits associated with being ANY LA +0 race when you take an LA + 1 race MUST be taken into consideration. It is not moot at all.

Yes, "it is just a frame of reference" in that one could pick a different LA + 0 race other than human; I chose the simplest one, but we could make it more complicated by picking a different race--fair enough. But it is incorrect not to take any race as a starting point -- that is actively misleading when one reckons the cost of an LA + 1 (or +2 or whatever) race.

I don't think there is anything we are actually disagreeing about; is there?

 

[Nonlethal Force]

Nope, not at all actually. Iw as just saying you were looking at it from a different frame of reference. I don't disagree with you at all.

In fact, what I actually tell me players is to look at the benefits each race gains and look at what an LA +X race gives you. Realize what you are trading by choosing one over the other.

And ... if you are looking to strengthen your argument, btw, it is really more than 4 skillpoints. it is four skillpoints + 1 skillpoint every level after that. Rather significant, if you ask me.

Here's why - that +4 the hobgoblin gets to move silently can be made up by the fact that the human gets 4 ranks in the first level. (Not exactly, because these are racial and thus the hobgoblin could take ranks in addition to the +4 and get a higher Move Silently total than the human could. I know that much ...) But, the human character is going to get an additional skillpoint over the hobgoblin in the same class with the same intelligence. So, while the hobgoblin is figuring out skill for the rest of their life, the human is figuring out the same skills plus one more (Eventually making up the difference with that racial +4 many times over!).

So, to use my LA +0 hobgoblin, the bonus skillpoints that the human gets and the +4 Move silently than the hobgoblin receives is relatively equivalent. So, my LA +0 hobgoblin gets darkvision whereas the human gets a feat. Personally, I'd rather take a human (hence why my LA +0 hobgoblin is admittedly weaker). But ... I occasionally play that one myself just because I think hobgoblins are cool, even though I know I am taking a weaker race.

 

[HeavyG]

There is an optional rule, in the Player's Guide to Faerun I believe, that suggests that if you let a player play a ECL character at 1st level then give him a kind of "negative level" to compensate until he has earned enough XP to be a legal character.

Thus, a 1st level aasimar paladin would get a -1 to attacks, saves and skill checks until he earned 1000 XP.

A 1st level drow wizard would get a -2 penalty to the same rolls until he got 1000 Xp, then the penalty would drop to -1 until 3000 XPs are reached.

I do believe the penalty, unlike a real negative level, doesn't apply to hit points or caster level checks.

At first glance, it seems viable. My DM is using the rule for his new campaign and I'll be trying it with my goliath druid.