Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="paradox42" data-source="post: 2900433" data-attributes="member: 29746">As I've said in other threads, I've done this in my own campaigns for several years- in fact all of the races in my homebrew are balanced to approximate a +2 LA in the core game, but because they're all so balanced I then (basically) subtract 2 from the LA of every race. So races in my game that actually carry an LA would, in core, have LA +3 or more. It works pretty well, and allows for some exotic races and combinations without anybody really being overshadowed. As soon as I saw the "buying off level adjustment" rules in Unearthed Arcana I adopted them, and several players have taken advantage- particularly when creating new PCs at high level. As long as you use standard XP granting rules, which grant higher awards to lower-level characters, the gap eventually vanishes and everybody's happy.That said, I like papastebu's suggestion a lot- it could let people take regular, core PHB races and play them alongside the rest in your game without unbalancing things. Give them a couple of "phantom levels" in racial paragon classes to balance out the LA the other PCs get, and they effectively become characters of more powerful races deserving of a level adjustment.Lorgrom's suggestion of XP costs is one I've seen mentioned several times, and one DM I played with briefly wanted to try it, but that campaign died before we could try it so I've never seen any evidence on how well (or not) it works. My feeling is that a lot of players would feel like it was extra math and dislike it on that basis, but it probably balances things better than traditional LA.</blockquote>

Verification