Dragon PCs - weak, weak, weak

[Scion]

Dragon pc's would be pretty underpowered in the spell department. I would suggest coming up with some houserule to fix that problem. They should probably never be 'great' casters, but proficient enough to compete without having to be a melee body would be nice.

I know a dm friend of mine who was having a problem with casters and large hd races. The solution we came up with was that adding levels of caster would count for a lot less cr based on how many hd the creature had. Basically the rundown went something along the lines of if the creature has base hd X then you could have up to X/2 levels of abilities only for a set amount of cr boost depedent on the type of creature they were. For a dragon pc, say 6hd dragon to make it easy, this would be 3. So I'd say for each level they gain that is a caster they would gain one level of it and one psuedo level up to a max of 3 psuedo levels. At 6hd + 3 caster they would be a 6th level caster and a 9th level pc. Should work out pretty well. You could even make up a feat for them to buy which would increase how many psuedo levels they could gain.. power for power, it works and should be balanced.

Sorry to stray so far into houserules everyone

 

[Altalazar]

Call it a gut reaction, but it feels to me like many of the "monster" PCs seem to have a slightly higher level adjustment than I'd say is warranted.

I had experience with a gnoll PC in one of my campaigns - gnoll druid. I did a +1 for that (this was before Savage Species) and it seemed to work out rather well - though even with that, at times it seemed like that player was behind, rather than at the same level as, the others. As the levels of the party progressed, it felt futher and further behind. It was a close thing, however. Now, savage species seems to think it is a +2, which I know from personal experience to be way off - +1 at most, and even that was still a bit on the weak side. In the end, all the gnoll got was a handful of extra hitpoints, something really the equivalent of a feat, not a whole class level.

I get the feeling this was an intentional thing, to penalize non-standard PC races for reasons that escape me. It would make sense to balance. It makes no sense to introduce something new, then immediately nerf it so it is unbalanced in the weak direction.

 

[Spatula]

I had experience with a gnoll PC in one of my campaigns - gnoll druid. I did a +1 for that (this was before Savage Species) and it seemed to work out rather well - though even with that, at times it seemed like that player was behind, rather than at the same level as, the others. As the levels of the party progressed, it felt futher and further behind. It was a close thing, however. Now, savage species seems to think it is a +2, which I know from personal experience to be way off - +1 at most, and even that was still a bit on the weak side. In the end, all the gnoll got was a handful of extra hitpoints, something really the equivalent of a feat, not a whole class level.

2d8 hit points (+ Con) is a bit more than a feat. Then add in stat boosts, darkvision, +1 BAB, +3 to Fort saves, etc. But a +2 LA does seem a bit on the high side for gnolls - especially if the character is a spellcaster. Part of the problem is that LAs have to be one-size-fits all, but a spellcaster monster is definitely worse off than a warrior monster since it's so far behind in spellcasting power. In any case, the 3.5 SRD lists gnolls as being +1 again.

For an all-dragon campaign, the DM might as well just ignore the whole ECL thing once you get past race selection. Start everyone off with dragons of equivalent power, give them a class level as if they were 1st level and go from there. The ECL mechanic is to balance more powerful races with the normal ones - if everyone's race is at the same power level, then you're back to the situation that you get when creating a party just using the core races.

 

[Scion]

2d8 hit points (+ Con) is a bit more than a feat. Then add in stat boosts, darkvision, +1 BAB, +3 to Fort saves, etc.

Since the hd already give a level adjustment of sorts there is definately no need for any further LA. Those hd that they gained came with effectively nothing that a normal character should have. Would you rather be a 2hd gnoll or a 2nd level whatever from the phb? The 2nd level character would be better in nearly every way. Let alone adding any extra la on there!

 

[Spatzimaus]

There are a few interwoven problems here, and each should be resolved separately.

NUMBER 1: Savage Species' ECL/LA system sucks.
This one's been argued to death, but for those of you new to the debate, the problem is simple: 1 HD should not equal 1 ECL. One level of a PC class is one ECL; 1 HD of any type is inferior to a class level. So, you get a ridiculous situation: if two different races both have the same special abilities and the same LA, the one with more HD will be weaker than the one with less. Ergo, LA is only useful when considered in conjunction with the HD, not as an independent variable; a high-HD creature should have a low (or even negative) LA to compensate for its inferior HD.
Solution: Just use one ECL number that accounts both for the HD and the special abilities in a fair way. For this, I'd suggest Soldarin's ECL system, although there have been a few other good ones. Whatever system you use, just make sure that it's balanced well.

NUMBER 2: The D&D spellcasting system is very level-dependent.
Having really great stats doesn't make up for a shortage of caster levels, so playing a high-ECL race neuters you as a caster. For the lone dragon PC in a group of human adventurers, this isn't an issue, but an all-dragon group is something else...
Solution: There isn't an easy solution. If you want casters in the group that can deal well with SR and Epic-level foes, you'll need them to be simple Humans and such. Or, revamp D&D's entire magic system to be purely stat- and skill-based. But, as it is right now, a Dragon's magic is good for two things: buffing/non-combat stuff, and attacking hordes of much weaker opponents.

NUMBER 3: Blending in is A Good Thing.
Unless you're one of the dragon types that can polymorph, forget it. You'll stick out, and in general you'll be left behind whenever the party needs to enter a building, dungeon, or do anything weight-limited (teleportation?) In a more general way, certain abilities or drawbacks that would be relatively minor in a foe become hugely important in a PC. I played a Giant Owl Psion PC once, and things were really difficult for me until I reached a level where I could use Polymorph Self. Before then, I had to make a lot of arrangements... (Leadership, with a cohort who could take care of things for me, that sort of thing)
Solution: Play in a setting where remaining in your natural form isn't a problem, or make sure you get a dragon breed that polymorphs from the start. If you have to get the DM to fudge the abilities a bit, do it. (Offer to trade some of the low-end spell-like abilities for a basic human-to-dragon shapeshift, he might go for it)


Anyway, I think that covers the basics.

 

[pawsplay]

Don't these dragon PCs also get three good saves, blindsense, winged flight, and lots of skills? Plus there's Feats like the improved natural attack, +DC natural abilities, increased natural armor, etc.

I'd be a Ranger, with a Favored Enemy of humans.

 

[Spatula]

Since the hd already give a level adjustment of sorts there is definately no need for any further LA. Those hd that they gained came with effectively nothing that a normal character should have.

The gnoll doesn't get class abilities, yes, although you can consider the 'extras' that gnolls have to be its class abilities - its ability score bonuses, its natural armor, its darkvision. It still gets attack & saving throws bonuses, skill points, weapon & armor proficiencies, etc.

 

[Scion]

Exactly my point, it sucks a lot as is, putting a LA on top of that is just overkill.

 

[James McMurray]

Half-orc Fighter 4
Str +2
4d10 hit dice
BAB: +4
5 feats
base saves:
fort: +4
ref: +1
will: +1
Skill points: 7 x (2 + Int mod)

Gnoll Fighter 1
+4 strength
+2 con
2d8 + 1d10 hit dice
BAB +2
4 feats
30' speed
base saves:
fort: +5
ref: +0
will: +0
Natural Armor +1
Skill points: 5 x (2 + Int mod) + (2 + Int Mod)

Overall the two characters seem pretty even. The half-orc has a few more hit points, but over time the Gnoll's increased con stat will even that out. At ECL 20 the gnoll will have about 163 hit point (assuming base con of 14 + 2 for race) while the 1/2 orc would only have 154.

The half-orc would have one more iterative attack, but the gnoll's increased strength is going to make him slightly hit more often for slightly more damage.

The half-orc has more skill points, but the gnoll had listen and spot as class skills for a while. Those are some pretty useful skills, so I figure this about evens out. Sves are about equal. The gnoll is weaker in his weak areas, but stronger in his strong areas.

Looks like LA (for the gnoll at least) is pretty darned close.

 

[Scion]

So you compare the worst phb race by far and the worst class by far (that second one is in my opinion of course ) and over all they arent horribly far apart from one another? I am far from convinced that the +1 LA is needed, this actually seems like an argument FOR the LA not being needed.

How about comparing it to a class that actually has real abilities? Along with a race that isnt the half orc or half elf ;/ who are both in trouble. Humans tend to work decently for such comparisons.