Buy off LA?

[Shin Okada]

Not even CLOSE.

#Centaur barb 10 has two fewer hit die (and four of those dice are two sizes smaller)
2 fewer HD is still bad when spells like blasphemy is cast. But in regard to HP, Centaur has +4 Con. That is +14 hp at this level and make the total hp closer.

#only two attacks (the natural attack is useless at that level)

The 3rd attack is done at -10. Depending on enemy, but it is often useless against worthy enemy of someone's level. And think about the highest attack bonus. Assume both Centaur and Human puts 18 to their strength. Now Centaur Barb 10 has 26 +2= str 28 (+9 bonus). Human Barb 16 has 18+4- str 22(+6 bonus). With the difference in BAB (2) and size penalty (-1), both barbarians have the same highest attack bonus. And as Centaur is using one size larger weapon and is stronger, each swing inflicts much damages. Combined with hoof attacks, I say Centaur wins in the total damage output against most foe. And this is when they make a full attack. If they move and attack, centaur is simply stronger in offence.

#one less feat, significantly fewer skill points,

But much faster (now 60 feet) and +4 to almost all the rolls regarding special attacks due to their size. Even has +4 more against tripping because of 4 legs. And +3 natural armor is simply good.

# worse fort save,

Not quite. 16th level barbarian's Base saves are Fort +10, Ref +5, Will +5. Centaur Barb 10's Base Saves are Fort +8, Ref +7, Will +7. With +4 Con, the Centaur and the Human has now the same Fort save. And combined with +4 Dex and +2 Wis, Centaur have much higher Ref and Will.

#no reach despite being large size,
Human does not have long reach, too.

#they don't even know COMMON without a positive Int (which has a negative

modifier for Centaurs) or spending two of their limited skill points.
But they speak sylvan and Elven. It may cause problem or maybe better then just speaking common. It all depends on campaign. And spending 2 skill points are not big deal.


#Then they lose 6 levels of barbarian, which is 2 uses of rage (leaving them only 3, which isn't even enough to use it every encounter in a 'standard' day), greater rage, indomitable will, and two steps of trap sense.

Why rage per day is less, each rage lasts longer thanks to high Con. And difference in damage output is still on the centaur's side due to the bigger weapon (say, 3d6 instead of 2d6) and higher strength. Human Barbarian in Greater Rage still has lower STR and Will save comparing to a centaur in normal Rage.

#reduction in DR by 2,
Yeah. But while it has 2 less DR, it has +4 AC in total (-1 size, +2 Dex, +3 natural).

#Oh yeah, not to mention: just try playing a centaur in a standard dungeon. 5' door? You're screwed. Have to climb a rope? Better hope the wizard has two fly spells prepared (one coming, one going)! Charging? Yeah right.

Well, centaur should use squeezing rule if he tries to move through a 5-foot door. But large space means he can cover 10-foot door by himself alone. Sometime it is good. Sometime it is bad.

As for climbing, by 16th-ECL it is not difficult to have some means of flying and such. Potion of Flying is just 750gp. And, don't underestimate Centaur's Jumping. They gets bonuses from high strength and high speed.

#By your definition, any race with LA is 'not meant to be effective as casters'. So what you're saying is that you should only play a caster if you are playing a LA+0 race.

Basically, yes. Power-gaming wise. In most cases LA +0 is the way to go.

#LA does NOT work well at higher levels. ESPECIALLY for spellcasters. The only class LA doesn't bother terribly much at high levels is Fighter, and as I mentioned Fighters are such a throwaway that anything that helps them is good.

No. LA does not work for spellcasters AT ANY LEVEL. And even for fighter types, LA is a big burden at lower level. But with good combination of race and classes, med-to-higher level warriors are OK as they are now.

So, If you want to make LA+X race playable as a caster, removing LA at higher level is not the way to go. It will still leave lower-level LA +X casters in poor position. While at higher level, simply makes LA +X races (now with reduced or eliminated LA) stronger than others.

By the way, if do not compare a pure warrior type against a pure caster type. In a duel, a mage tend to win. Still, A mage can't adventure alone.

 

[Zurai]

Still, A mage can't adventure alone.

High level ones can. I'll leave the rest of the points because you're just parroting your original statements and not even trying to look at things objectively. You've clearly made up your mind and not Hell nor high water will change it.

 

[Sylrae]

#
#By your definition, any race with LA is 'not meant to be effective as casters'. So what you're saying is that you should only play a caster if you are playing a LA+0 race.

Basically, yes. Power-gaming wise. In most cases LA +0 is the way to go.

There are a number of races - Drow, for example, who are described as being supposedly better spellcasters than humans. LA Makes them worse because they can't cast the higher levels spells, thus being 100% contradictory to the racial concept. Isn't some sort of spellcasting compensation necessary? (I Believe something needs to be done to make it better balanced)

#
#LA does NOT work well at higher levels. ESPECIALLY for spellcasters. The only class LA doesn't bother terribly much at high levels is Fighter, and as I mentioned Fighters are such a throwaway that anything that helps them is good.

No. LA does not work for spellcasters AT ANY LEVEL. And even for fighter types, LA is a big burden at lower level. But with good combination of race and classes, med-to-higher level warriors are OK as they are now.

At least we agree that LA as is is busted. +LA Races, as you have pointed out, are inherently weaker than normal races, even though, the point of LA is to make more powerful races on par with the non +LA players.

#
#So, If you want to make LA+X race playable as a caster, removing LA at higher level is not the way to go. It will still leave lower-level LA +X casters in poor position. While at higher level, simply makes LA +X races (now with reduced or eliminated LA) stronger than others.

So since we agree that LA doesn't work as is, and you don't think buying off LA solves the issue, let's correct the problem over HERE.

I have a few ideas up there, lets refine them and make them better, and hopefully make LA and HD races a viable option for everyone, not just people who are willing to have crappy characters in the name of roleplaying something creative or different.

 

[Shin Okada]

High level ones can. I'll leave the rest of the points because you're just parroting your original statements and not even trying to look at things objectively. You've clearly made up your mind and not Hell nor high water will change it.

Look at things objectively. Hm. Then I say, let's see from another side.

Assume you are a DM. One player is playing an Elven wizard and another player made a drow wizard. Now, due to that LA buy off rule. Both of them are 20th-level. Compare those 2 characters. Drow has higher Int and Cha (thus higher DC for her spells) and Spell Resistance 31 which is always on. Seemingly stronger than plain core elf. Is it fair for the player of elven mage?

 

[Sylrae]

Look at things objectively. Hm. Then I say, let's see from another side.

Assume you are a DM. One player is playing an Elven wizard and another player made a drow wizard. Now, due to that LA buy off rule. Both of them are 20th-level. Compare those 2 characters. Drow has higher Int and Cha (thus higher DC for her spells) and Spell Resistance 31 which is always on. Seemingly stronger than plain core elf. Is it fair for the player of elven mage?

Higher Int and Cha give Higher DCs yes.
SR 29, not 31 because he only has 18 levels.

However, The Elf Wizard has more level 20 spells per day, a bonus feat, and another spell known.

I'd say at 20 they're about even.
Nevermind I missed part of that post. I thought he meant 18 drow 20 wizard.
20 drow wiz is better than plain 20 wizard. but by then the wizard is likely at 21.
Especially if the DM doesnt give experience based on player level so much as monster versus party level, and everything gets the same from monsters.

it's between level 1 and maybe 15 (for the drow) where being 2 levels behind means youre screwed. - both in spells, and in the earlier levels, in hit points. Also, for touch attacks/ranged touch attacks, your BAB is lower.

I'm going to semi agree. the variant still doesnt really address the problem. but there IS a problem with LA. For spellcasters and for regular classes.

for the races where level adjust actually fits, maybe spread the missed levels out more. Of have some sort of partial levels or something where you dont get class abilities.

Drow of the underdark has a decent way to deal with it for drow. They spread out the Drow +2 LA over 4 levels. Personally I think it needs to be more spread out than that.

For HD creatures that also have an LA is where I see real issues. Monster Hit Dice, by themselves are not equivalent to class levels. Classes get class abilities, and bonus feats, and spells. Usually the total ECL of a monster with abilities, has less extras than a character with the same amount in levels. Especially where some monsters have low CR and just get a shitload of hit points. Instead of LA, which go on TOP of Hit Dice, we need like a LEq (Level Equivalent) which includes all monster Hit Dice AND Level adjustments. So it would be possible for a creature to have 12 hit dice and count as a level 8 character, for example, if it doesnt get the special abilities to make it worth a total +12.

Of course, that means assigning LEq values to monsters, but thats entirely doable, and in my opinion that's what they should have done in the first place.

I see a problem, I try to come up with solutions. Sometimes those solutions are to fix a broken rule. These are obviously just Ideas, but if we collectively come up with the idea, we can use it. Suddenly our issues with ho LA sucks the life out of your characters is not a problem, and players are more balanced with eachother than they are now - where HD+LA creatures are totally shafted , and where LA no HD monsters are slightly less shafted.

 

[Zurai]

Look at things objectively. Hm. Then I say, let's see from another side.

Assume you are a DM. One player is playing an Elven wizard and another player made a drow wizard. Now, due to that LA buy off rule. Both of them are 20th-level. Compare those 2 characters. Drow has higher Int and Cha (thus higher DC for her spells) and Spell Resistance 31 which is always on. Seemingly stronger than plain core elf. Is it fair for the player of elven mage?

Drow won't have a higher DC than the LA+0 MM1 Gray Elf wizard, who both get a +2 int. The +2 cha has no effect on wizard spell DCs. The only thing the drow really gets is the spell resistance, and at that level 31 spell resist is "oh, OK, I spend a swift action on my first turn to cast assay spell resistance and auto-succeed on SR checks", or even "oh, OK, I have the Arcane Mastery feat and just take 10 on my SR check, auto-succeeding". Spell Resistance's usefulness is inversely proportionate to the level of the critter with SR - ie, it's far more useful at lower levels than higher ones.

So, yes, I think it's perfectly fair, especially since the drow wizard sucked for the first 18 or so levels. Delayed payoff is a form of balance.

 

[irdeggman]

Look at things objectively. Hm. Then I say, let's see from another side.

Assume you are a DM. One player is playing an Elven wizard and another player made a drow wizard. Now, due to that LA buy off rule. Both of them are 20th-level. Compare those 2 characters. Drow has higher Int and Cha (thus higher DC for her spells) and Spell Resistance 31 which is always on. Seemingly stronger than plain core elf. Is it fair for the player of elven mage?

But just because they are the same level does not mean they are in the same location on that level.

The drow level buy back is:

7,000 xp for the first LA (1,000 x 7, and must be 8th level ECL (ECL) to do this) {has a +2 LA and must be 6th level in classes to be eligible}

and

10,000 xp for the 2nd LA (1000 x 9 and must be at least 10th level (ECL) to do this) {has a +1 LA and must be 9th level in classes to be eligible}

That is 17,000 points (minimum) difference.

To reach 21st level a character needs 210,000 xp

To reach 20th level a character needs 190,000 xp

Which means it takes 20,000 xp to get from 20th to 21st level.

So the one who didn't have to buy back levels is a heck of lot closer.

And before going on and saying that he will gain more xp earlier since he is "lower level" - remember that there is a risk associated with that gain.

He is also more likely to die. He will have less hit points (less HD), less chance to hit (lower BAB due to less HD), lower saving throws, less spells, etc.

Oh and the drow also has light blindness (always on) {can be a major drawback} and no low-light vision (even though he has 120 dark vision) {dark vision tends to be better, but may not be based on circumstances - like outdoors at night.

 

[Sylrae]

Delayed payoff is a form of balance.

Except I've never been in a game that went past level 15 and in that campaign we started at 12. - I should note I've been playing D&D Regularly since third came out. There has been maybe 9 months in the time since it came out that I didnt play (all together)
It's hard to get a campaign that lasts more than 6 months (or 24 sessions), and unless youre really liberal with experience points you wont get to 20 in that time. Starting at Higher levels is ridiculous because none of the characters have any connection with eachother so for anything other than a stomp in the door kill the monsters grab the treasure and sell it to get better gear to repeat the process, the characters are useless in interacting with eachother about 3 out of 5 times.
Usually I have been in campaigns that last like 4 months, start at level 3, and make it (Maybe - to 11 before they end).

I dont think Delayed payoff works well. Something more gradual would work better.

I think a 18 Drow Wizard is about even with a 19th regular wizard, but not 20th.
Maybe Drow should give +1 level to a caster class (like most PrCs do)

Once Again: Minotaur is not worth 8 levels (You may as well count the HD because they screw you as much as the LA Does. Maybe 6, Maybe 7, if HD have to convert directly to levels. otherwise my inclination would be to figure out how to balance it in a less crappy, and I figure it would likely be worth 5 levels.

 

[irdeggman]

Or use the Savage Progressions articles from WotC:

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

Or the

lesser drow from Races of Faerun

(Several LA races were handled such that they no longer had LA but still had at least most of the "feel" of the original races, just less "power").

 

[Sylrae]

I've seen the Savage Progressions. They work for some races - They work for Drow except for the 2 levels behind thing - but just add +1 spellcasting (like a PrC) to favored class at level two and it's good.

That still doesn't fix the fact that for a number of monsters, Hit Dice+Level Adjust is not equal to a comparable class at the same ECL. The Monster Dice + Level adjust is simply too big a number for what you get. Hell. The Hit Dice may count as too big a number for what you get. Like most constructs. even if theyre awakened. 1- im not sure where youd get the LA, but 2, the HD give you virtually nothing.

Now Someone should help me assign LAs, or LEqs to my Drider Templates .

Or, Help me come up with a System to fix LA for the races it just isnt reasonable with.