How is a vampire possibly worth +8 LA?

[Sledge]

so that vampire has the negligible hit points, reasonable ac, poor bab, poor saves, neglible class abilities, and a few normal skills. The big powers of the vampire are pretty much duplicatable by 5th level or lower spells.
In other words a 9th level wizard will be able to equal or outdo everything the vampire can do at ECL 13, but the wizard won't have any penalties or restrictions.
The only real thing the vampire has going for it is the ability to run away when taken out. However since even a 7th level wizard will take out the vamp with one spell this ability really means the vampire is always running from battle in the hope that nothing will ever have gust of wind or wind wall prepared to stall it.
However the thing here is that Wizards likes to overcalculate LA. On p 127 of the DMG it discusses LA and has categories for what creatures will throw a campaign out of whack and so have had their LA inflated to prevent this from happening.

 

[Rystil Arden]

However the thing here is that Wizards likes to overcalculate LA. On p 127 of the DMG it discusses LA and has categories for what creatures will throw a campaign out of whack and so have had their LA inflated to prevent this from happening.

Well, with good reason. I'd rather have 100 races with an LA that is too high (Vampire, Hobgoblin) than even 1 playable PC race with an LA that is too low (Warforged, Whisper Gnome). The races with an LA too high don't really affect your game--players just won't play it, and if they do, you can work something out. The races with LA too low (unless you just ban them) not only cause grief because you have to make changes to balance the game when people start trying to play them, they also lead to a dangerous effect where other designers decide that it's okay to balance new races based on the ones with underconned LA.

 

[Moonstone Spider]

Kesho is looking a lot better if the wizard casts finger of death...he has a 100% chance to succeed against it.

If desintegrate is such a nasty spell for this guy, give him a ring of couterspells with disintegrate in it. Part of being a pc is learning to cover your weaknesses.

And he'd have looked even worse if the Wizard cast "Command Undead," or a Cleric tried to turn Kesho. That would never affect Okesh. Thus I tried to pick a spell that would affect both of them on a relatively equal basis.

Originally I planned to write out three spells but realized that analysis was getting ludicrously long. That's the same reason I left out equipment considerations.

However anybody is naturally free to invent more scenarios and test the comparison under other circumstances. That's why I supplied all the feats and such even when they didn't play a role in my own scenarios.

I'm not saying the analysis is wrong, its just incomplete. It forgets that a pc vampire will do what he can to cover his bases, its not another npc with some random gear, the pc takes and keeps what is useful. The vampire has more natural armor than a normal guy but less to hit, perhaps he'll opt for a amulet of mighty fists instead of an amulet of natural armor for example.

I also don't think the monk comparison is the best one, as monks suffer badly from multiclassing in the first place. A fighter or a rogue would be a better fighter example.

Actually I think a Fighter would be notably worse. A Vampire Fighter (without Toughness) would have the same HD as Kesho (84). A human fighter would start with 115 or so and would pretty much certainly have a high CON modifier since a fighter is basically just pure CON and STR. Putting CON at 18 (Actually unreasonably small for a 20th level fighter) he'd wind up with an additional 80HP for 195.

Lastly the fighter class pretty much lives to go PrC. The Vampire LA would likely eat your PrC levels so you're not just losing 4 bonus feats, you're losing something that's probably extremely powerful.

As for Rogue. . . a Vampire can never enter a non-public house or other building without permission. Your rogue is unable to sneak inside anywhere so you're kind of boned for one of the major Rogue activities.

I think just glancing at it that the best class might be Swashbuckler. High STR and INT will stack on damage rolls, high DEX for Finesse Weapon, natural armor makes up for the Swashbuckler's light armor restriction, Swashbuckler's Good Luck abilities can help keep the vampire alive when it's weak low saves would otherwise get it killed. Good Armor, mediocre hitpoints, low to-hit but high damage on those hits.

 

[Question]

Well, with good reason. I'd rather have 100 races with an LA that is too high (Vampire, Hobgoblin) than even 1 playable PC race with an LA that is too low (Warforged, Whisper Gnome). The races with an LA too high don't really affect your game--players just won't play it, and if they do, you can work something out. The races with LA too low (unless you just ban them) not only cause grief because you have to make changes to balance the game when people start trying to play them, they also lead to a dangerous effect where other designers decide that it's okay to balance new races based on the ones with underconned LA.

Im seeing the exact reverse happening. Too many races/templates with LA that is too high, players cant use what should be perfectly viable choices when making a PC, DMs are either too scared to modify races/templates with too high LA to be playable(or they blindly believe everything wizards has balanced is perfect, and that the LA really fits the bonuses given), and the races with LA too low arent chosen that much in the first place(i almost never see whisper gnomes or warforged for example, even goliaths which are an insanely good LA +1), and designers always err on the side of caution(balance things based on underpowered items, which always explains how you get feats, PRCs, so on and so forth that are underpowered and non-viable for gameplay).

It doesnt matter what ECL your party is at, a vamprie PC -will- get one hit KOed, quite possibly in the surprise round even. No XP, no loot.....it is going to suck, and god forbid where you have to do something in DAYTIME......or even something as simple as sneaking into the BBEG's lair. D&D is meant to have a decent amount of combat, how is something playable if you get one hit KOed first round in combat?

 

[ThirdWizard]

After reading this thread, I'd probably mark them at +6. Get rid of the dominate ability and drop them to +5.

 

[Nail]

... designers always err on the side of caution....

Errr....???

You're kidding, right?

(You haven't seen the powercreep in the WotC supplements?)

... It doesnt matter what ECL your party is at, a vamprie PC -will- get one hit KOed, quite possibly in the surprise round even. No XP, no loot.....

Killed PCs get XP from a otherwise successful combat. DMG p.41. As for loot, that's up to the party....depending on the group, I've seen even those killed get a share (once brought back, of course).

 

[monboesen]

It doesnt matter what ECL your party is at, a vamprie PC -will- get one hit KOed, quite possibly in the surprise round even. No XP, no loot.....it is going to suck, and god forbid where you have to do something in DAYTIME......or even something as simple as sneaking into the BBEG's lair. D&D is meant to have a decent amount of combat, how is something playable if you get one hit KOed first round in combat?

People play D&D in all kinds of ways.


If you play a back to the dungeon, kill it all, loot it all kind of game, a vampire won't be pulling his weight (but why would a vampire even be there in the first place).


If you play a urban based, socially plot driven, no railroading kind of game a vampire will do just fine.



If you want to play a BADASS fighter KILLING and LOOTING maybe the vampire template isn't a good choise, just like the half-dragon template tends to suck majorly for spell casters.

If you want to play a tricky jack of many trades with lots of special powers/immunities and harsh weaknesess the vampire template might be just the thing.



IMO if you are looking at a creature or template with an ECL of more than +2 it is time to stop and realize that the creature is in fact not suited for regular D&D games. So if you want to use it you need to do some thinking and talking with your DM before going on.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Too many races/templates with LA that is too high, players cant use what should be perfectly viable choices when making a PC

That's presuming a lot. I contend that no matter what side of the discussion they are on in terms of the balance at +8 LA, you won't find almost anyone else in this thread who agrees that things like vampires are 'perfectly viable choices when making a PC'. Vampires are crazy-weird choices with tons of immunities, at will powers, and weaknesses too. They are not at all perfectly-viable--a GM would have to change around just about any adventure (especially pre-published adventures which tend to be less flexible) to be a good fit for a vampire, which would not happen for a perfectly-viable character.

 

[pawsplay]

It doesnt matter what ECL your party is at, a vamprie PC -will- get one hit KOed, quite possibly in the surprise round even. No XP, no loot.....it is going to suck, and god forbid where you have to do something in DAYTIME......or even something as simple as sneaking into the BBEG's lair. D&D is meant to have a decent amount of combat, how is something playable if you get one hit KOed first round in combat?

Hm, that could be bad news for my level 200 game...

 

[Grog]

If you play a urban based, socially plot driven, no railroading kind of game a vampire will do just fine.

Actually, the vampire will suck at that, too. His Diplomacy, Gather Information, and all Knowledge skills will be eight ranks behind a standard-race character of the same ECL. I'm guessing that, if you're playing an urban based, socially plot-driven campaign, those skills will all be pretty critical, and the vampire won't be worth half a damn at any of them.

The simple fact of the matter is that there's nothing a vampire PC can do that a standard-race PC can't do much, much better.