Do you use Non-associated class levels?

[MerricB]

It probably should be noted that I've actually run "The Hall of Harsh Reflections" with the actual Mindflayer Sorcerer 7.

The first combat (against six level 7 PCs, IIRC) was game, set and match to the Mindflayer, with at least two PC deaths.

The second combat had two invisible, flying fighters (alright, a barbarian and a paladin) blindsiding the Mind-flayer as the rest of the party distracted him, and then scoring criticals as he provoked AoOs as he moved closer to the rest of the party... that was a good feeling for the party.

Cheers!

 

[Cam Banks]

They're not associated.

The Monster Manual appears to disagree with you.

What I find hard to determine is which classes are non-associated with dragons. A dragon HD is superior to most classes, and although adding sorcerer levels stacks with any existing dragon caster level, it seems as if it's something of a disadvantage to the dragon to advance with poor saves, d4 HD, 2 skill points/die, and poor BAB.

Cheers,
Cam

 

[BryonD]

I use non-associated classes fairly frequently.
Though I pretty much make case by case judgments regarding CR.

 

[Beckett]

The Monster Manual appears to disagree with you.

What I find hard to determine is which classes are non-associated with dragons. A dragon HD is superior to most classes, and although adding sorcerer levels stacks with any existing dragon caster level, it seems as if it's something of a disadvantage to the dragon to advance with poor saves, d4 HD, 2 skill points/die, and poor BAB.

Cheers,
Cam

And at least two Paizo staffers (Jason Bulhman and James Jacobs, iirc) stated over on their board that the MM was incorrect on the Mind Flayer Sorcerer CR. I'm inclined to agree with them. MerricB has already covered my arguments pretty well.

My players haven't yet encountered the Mind Flayer (they started HoHR last night, and might get their first encounter with him in the next session), but I expect similar results to MerricB's experince.

I think the biggest reason to count the sorcerer levels as non-associated is that the Mind Flayer can still only do one thing in a round. Even with practiced spellcaster, it's only an 11th level caster. The increased SR is the biggest problem for characters; it goes from a difficult feat to overcome for an 8th level caster to an impossible one. Still, spellcasters in the party are not completely worthless; the various orb spells ignore SR.

 

[Psion]

Yes, I do use non-associated class levels.

Yes, those 7 levels of sorcerer are very much so associated for a mind flayer.

No, they aren't. The sorcerer class levels don't stack. You are still only giving a creature 3rd level spells that has at will use of an equivalent 4th or 5th level spell. Yes, it helps. No, not that much.

If it was a Rakshasa with sorcerer levels (or an XPH Mind Flayer with Psion levels), then they would be associated.

 

[Arnwyn]

I'm wondering who else uses this rule.

All the time.

While the 3.5 MM does indeed assume that sorcerer levels are considered associated levels, everything I have heard since that publication (including from Paizo and WotC staffers) is that it's not correct.

 

[pawsplay]

The Monster Manual appears to disagree with you.

What I find hard to determine is which classes are non-associated with dragons. A dragon HD is superior to most classes, and although adding sorcerer levels stacks with any existing dragon caster level, it seems as if it's something of a disadvantage to the dragon to advance with poor saves, d4 HD, 2 skill points/die, and poor BAB.

Cheers,
Cam

Sorcerer levels adds to the caster level; even with poor hit dice, you're still accumulating feats, and, oh boy, spells, and will soon by out-casting much older dragons.

Fighter, barbarian, and ranger levels seem like they would all work well, with the whole BAB thing. Paladin, too.

Rogues would get their sneak attack bonus on all their attacks under certain circumstances. While most dragons are too big to hide very well, many can turn invisible. And then there's that whole evasion thing.

Bard would be weird, but they do use Cha spells and it would be a nice boost for a number of skills. And at fairly low levels, their Perform checks could be very, very high.

I would say the non-associated classes for a dragon are monk, druid, cleric, and wizard.

 

[Sejs]

No, they aren't. The sorcerer class levels don't stack. You are still only giving a creature 3rd level spells that has at will use of an equivalent 4th or 5th level spell. Yes, it helps. No, not that much.

If it was a Rakshasa with sorcerer levels (or an XPH Mind Flayer with Psion levels), then they would be associated.

Again, I disagree. As for the sorcerer levels stacking with the caster level of their natural spell-likes - nah, I wasn't operating under that assumption to begin with (not counting situations like dragons, rakshasa, etc where they actually cast spells as X in addition to their other abilities). You're giving a creature 3rd level spells that has at-will use of a very small number of 4th/5th level spell-equivalent abilities. You're expanding their core schtick by quite a good amount. A normal Mind Flayer can charm, suggest, levitate, detect thoughts, and mind blast; shouldn't adding more spells that play to the same theme be appropriately associated?

If it were sufficient levels in Sorcerer to give the Mind Flayer access to Dominate Person, would they then become associated?

(Edit: Assuming, as you said, that the psionic version of the creature is unavailable for whatever reason; the telepath 'flayer is a much more elegent treatment, I must say.)

 

[MerricB]

What I find hard to determine is which classes are non-associated with dragons. A dragon HD is superior to most classes, and although adding sorcerer levels stacks with any existing dragon caster level, it seems as if it's something of a disadvantage to the dragon to advance with poor saves, d4 HD, 2 skill points/die, and poor BAB.

Indeed. The "associated/not-associated" system is a good starting point, but you really need to look at what the creature is about.

In these cases, I really look at the relationship between HD, CR and Caster Level.

Juvenile Red Dragon: 16 HD, CR 10, CL 1. There is no way that sorcerer levels are associated there. At this point, it's the fighting classes that are associated.

Old Red Dragon: 28 HD, CR 20, CL 11. Still no way that sorcerer levels are associated. This is a melee creature with lots of special abilities.

Great Wyrm Red Dragon: 40 HD, CR 26, CL 19. At this point we're getting much closer. The difference between CL 19 and CR 26 is quite close. Still, epic sorcerers don't suddenly gain much power. (And why are you adding sorcerer levels anyway?)

With spellcasters, the breakpoint is when Caster Level approaches Challenge Rating. Consider that an Eldritch Knight gives up 2 caster levels; when Caster Level is within 3 of the Challenge Rating, spellcasting levels begin to become associated, depending on other abilities.

Cheers!

 

[MerricB]

If it were sufficient levels in Sorcerer to give the Mind Flayer access to Dominate Person, would they then become associated?

That's 10 levels of Sorcerer.

At this point, things get interesting.

The CR is 8 (mind-flayer base) + 4 (8 levels of sorcerer to reach MF HD), + 2 (2 levels of sorcerer over cap) for CR 14. Each level of sorcerer from then on gives +1 CR.

Cheers!