A Method For Dealign With LA's?

[kahn_bloodbane]

in my games I just ignore it, and simply add an adjustment to the character level when determining xp. the character is effectively stronger than normal so when I give out xp to the group i count the fact there's a 'higher theorical level' in the group and give xp accordingly to the level of encounter.
for the rest the xp to level up remains the same, a human fighter would take few goblins to get 1000 xp to level while a fire giant fighter will take uhm probably a few ogres to. (too lazy to go watch tables now correct me if I'm wrong)

 

[Talonblaze]

@kahn_bloodbane
Aye, this is the typical normal situation most people with LA's have to deal with. Which in the long run, eventually starts to hurt the PC with the adjustment.

We like to keep our parties balanced on both spectrum's, for normal PC's or monsters. They get a small nice bonus at the start for strength, but have to kill stronger monsters and later that bonus becomes more minuscule but yet still retain that penalty.

We like a bit of diversity without things being too over the top or under the floor. (Hence my DM's current limitation to only +1 LA's since the drastic difference between +1 and +2's is quite drastic in power.)

 

[kitcik]

Yeah, you basically said it already, but the problem with just giving lower XP to the LA character is that if they pick an LA +5 race, the game will become unbalanced.

 

[Talonblaze]

Yeah, you basically said it already, but the problem with just giving lower XP to the LA character is that if they pick an LA +5 race, the game will become unbalanced.

Well for this particular instance we are only dealing with +1's. So at this time its not an issue. My thoughts on a higher LA is either extending the duration of the XP penalty or just increasing the rate per LA. like 10% was for +1s. a +5 would be 50% until it payed off I suppose. (Just a random stab, haven't really worked it out.)

 

[kitcik]

Hmmm. You got me thinking, kitcik. Maybe there're not so few instances in which those buy points are well worth it. Aasimar Cleric without losing levels... not too bad.

(I'd still not play an NPC class just to get my hands on a level adjusted race, though).

I basically agree with that. I am playing a thri-kreen monk right now.

I just had this vision of a jumping monk in my head ever since 3.5 was released, so I am finally doing it. +66 Jump skill at level 9.

I negotiated away some of the thri-kreen advantages (for instance, I cannot use my natural claw attacks or use multi-weapon fighting) in exchange for only taking 1 racial hit die (so I am a monstrous humanoid 1 / monk 8). I also bought off the LA. Not very good from an optimization point of view, but a lot of fun in my non-optimized party (our least effective character is our straight L9 druid, go figure).

I think the 8 point buy trade-off would open up a new set of potential combinations without being too unbalancing.

 

[kahn_bloodbane]

pehaps your missing my point, let's say.. the group is level 1's and there's a +5 LA in it. 1+5 = 6 /2 =3 so middle is level 3, thus, they ALL get the same xp, the non LA people are penalized by the fact someone is a member of a stronger race, why? because the whole adventure, for them, with his presence, is simply, easyer!
a group of 1st level characters helped by a fire giant doesn't learn much fighting goblins along him...
this keeps all players always at the same level. just make everyone progression slower. if the players gets angry at the giant because 'does all the work for them' can always throw him out of the group (risking getting squished too!), besides in my campaigns never happened, my players knows my worlds are realistic, not balanced. so if at 1st level they decide to go to the 'white dragon lair' they got the info of, they are going to die all at the hands of whathever dragon there is there so, people even with fire giants in party are more than happy to advance of level sloooooower, you never know what you might find!

 

[kitcik]

Adventuring with a 1st level party with a Rakshasa (and not playing the Rakshasa) doesn't sound like much fun to me, but whatever floats your boat.

 

[Talonblaze]

Well, considering this was originally designed for the low LA's I can see there is flaws. (Then again, what system doesn't?)

My DM was never considering people going past the 2 or 3 mark max for most of his campaigns.

But as noted above, the % xp eventually gets pretty over the top and stacks up slowly. A giant wanting to get to level 20 would need to accumulate 666,000 extra experience during his lifetime without the cap. Course people who have played high LA's before would probably know if this was high or low.

 

[irdeggman]

The best method I've seen so far is that done by a "Savage Progressions" article at the old Wizards 3rd edition site: have racial classes that replace the level adjustment.

I agree with this one.

They were 3.5 templates and LA races - not all but a whole lot of them.

 

[irdeggman]

I for one award XP to each PC separately, based upon their respective level. I know many DMs don't do that, but it's not exactly uncommon, either, I believe.

That happens to be the standard rule (DMG pg 37 - the other is an optional one (avg party level - group award) (DMG pg 39 variant free form xp).