LA confusion; Forked from: Reincarnate

[Theroc]

Forked from: Reincarnate

Don't forget Darvision 120 ft. That's double the range of other playable races.
The Spell Resistance scales with level, as does the caster level for the spell like abilities.
He gets a +2 on Will saves against all spells and effects, not just Enchantment and Charm.

Don't forget, Drow is originally LA+2.
You're probably right the mental bonusses alone are worth a +1.

But that still leaves the other +1.

Discussing the balance between dex and con: There are a lot more skills depending on Dex, and Dex increases your AC, so should prevent losing those hp you would have gotten from Con.....
Besides, that would require re-evaluating the LA of the core races.

If I were the DM, I might even have hold out for the LA+2. I think spell resistance (scaling with level) is worth a level adjustment all on its own.

Of course, this is assuming the level adjustment rules are balanced. Wich I'm pretty sure they're not, considering the amount of effort put in by people coming up with 'buy-off' methods.

Which reminds me: where can I find those? I might want to look in to that at some point to get rid of the LA, if the DM allows it, as well as allowing players in one of my games to buy off their LA.

I forked this off due to it's currently seeming emphasis on the Level adjustment, and I really didn't wanna derail the thread, so I figured a fork would be appropriate. Apologies if it was not.

Okay, being new, I really do not understand the "4 levels of Monstrous humanoid" and the LA stuff.

Can someone explain it to me in more simple terms and give me pretty examples?

Some basic questions:
Do LA and Monster hit dice stack?
Is buying off an LA really that major? Why?
Is having monster hit dice a positive or negative?

Any other relevant things I should know about LA's and such would be appreciated, as I am interested in various options which use races that have one or both.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

A character is of an Effective Character Level (ECL) equal to its class level, plus its Level Adjustment (LA), plus its Racial Hit Dice (RHD).

Note that many humanoid races (and almost all PC races) have no RHD. These races must have at least one class level, even if it's only Commoner.

Okay, some examples:

Drow -- LA +2, 0 RHD. A 5th level drow wizard has an ECL of 7. He or she has 5d4 hit dice. In a group of 7th level adventurers, a 5th level drow would work, in theory.

Gnoll -- LA +1, 2 RHD. A 5th level gnoll barbarian has an ECL of 8. He or she has 2d8 plus 5d12 hit dice. In a group of 8th level adveturers, a 5th level gnoll barbarian would work, in theory.

Hill Giant -- LA +4, 12 RHD. A classless hill giant has an ECL of 16. He or she has 12d8 hit dice. In a group of 16th level adveturers, a stock classless hill giant would work, in theory.

It's easy to confuse Challenge Rating and Level Adjustment, BTW. Challenge Rating is a DM's tool, not a player's tool. The drow above has a CR of 6, but a ECL of 7.

The difference primarily has to do with the usefulness of abilities, as compared over the long term (as a PC would use them) and the short term (as a DM would use them). A drow's abilities get much, much more use over the life of a PC than in the (typically short) life of an NPC, so LA "costs more."

Finally, the importance of LA tends to diminish as PCs rise in level. Unearthed Arcana has rules to "buy off" LA with experience points. Because of the way experience points work, buying off the LA eventually results in (for example) a 10th level gnoll barbarian who has slightly fewer XP than his 10th level adventuring companions, but is otherwise equivalent.

I could quibble with where UA sets the buy-off points, but the intent is good, and the theory behind it is sound. A gnoll's racial abilities are much less important, relatively speaking, as the gnoll's level increases. In fact, monsters with big RHD and LA usually are waaaay too weak at their "appropriate" level unless this variant is used.

 

[Runestar]

I think another reason why LA is often deemed underpowered is because the designers seemed to over-inflate it. For example, I am not sure what sort of yardstick they used to gauge a hill giant's viability as a PC, but it sure seems weak for its ECL of 16, compared to a barb16 or fighter16 (and these are already considered the crappier alternatives, you easily get more powerful combinations through multiclassing). What benefits you get out of its powerful physical stats seems more than overshadowed by its LA and inherent inferiority of giant HD compared to class lvs.

I like the idea behind ECL to allow powerful monsters as PCs, but it seems marred by extremely poor execution, IMO.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

I like the idea behind ECL to allow powerful monsters as PCs, but it seems marred by extremely poor execution, IMO.

The concept suffered, IMO, from two factors:

First, the desire to be conservative when opening up a whole new area of the rules.

Two, the fact that when LA and ECL were created, character optimization wasn't as well-known or rampant as it is now, and nor were there as many character options. (In other words, a hill giant probably matched up more evenly against a fighter created in 2004 than one created in 2008.)

FWIW, there are a few examples of LA being botched the other way. For example, arguably the half-ogre was over-powered at +1 LA. (Though as the player of one, I think it's under-powered at +2 LA, so dunno what the fix is there. Well, actually, we used the UA fix, which worked fine.)

The single most ridiculous example, IMO, is the whisper gnome from Races of Stone. +0 LA and demonstrably and objectively leaps and bounds ahead of every other +0 LA race. That one's gotta be a typo, but it was never errataed.

 

[irdeggman]

LA (and buying it back) is real important for spellcasting/manifesting classes and less important for warrior types.

Things to keep in mind:

xp awards and requirements to advance are based on ECL. This can come into play when approaching epic levels since a character with LA will be shy on class levels for epic class progressions and qualificaitons for epic feats since they have the xp of epic characters but not the hit dice.

Max skill ranks (also skill points gained), and level-based feat acquisition (the onles you gain every 3rd level) and ability score increases (the ones you gain every 4th level) are all based on hit dice not on ECL.

 

[Theroc]

So, LA is more negative than racial HD? Or am I confusing things?

Well, except you can't buyoff racial HD.

So, which of the races are things to be avoided in the future as a character that doesn't want to gimp themselves down the road? The Giants seemed... way excessive on the penalties, given they ended up being what, effectively level 16 before picking up a character level?

Does playing a Drow without the LA Buyoff rules gimp you horribly? Same with some of the other less 'extreme' races.

Basically, I'm curious which of the races are viable mechanically given the apparent overboardness of the LA and RHD and such.

Thanks for the help guys.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

So, LA is more negative than racial HD? Or am I confusing things?

If you mean that LA is a bigger hit to the character, then yes. Racial hit dice are weak compared to class hit dice, but at least you're getting something.

Well, except you can't buyoff racial HD.

But this is a pretty big "except." And note that buying off LA is an optional rule, not a core (or even "splatbook-official" rule.

So, which of the races are things to be avoided in the future as a character that doesn't want to gimp themselves down the road?

It depends.

Are you concerned with character optimization? Are you going to be a spellcaster, a skill-monkey, or a combat monster? Is your DM going to allow buying off LA?

All of these interact. For example, if you're going to play a spellcaster, pretty much always avoid anything with racial hit dice. And only accept even a +1 LA if the benefits to your class are major (or if your DM allows buy-off). On the other hand, racial hit dice aren't as bad for a combat-oriented character. On the third hand, a skill-monkey with racial hit dice gets screwed because most racial hit dice give (2+Int mod)*4 skill points for the first HD, and skill monkeys really need that big (8+Int mod)*4 early boost to skills.

But going the other way, it can be really fun to play something like, oh, a pixie. If you're not interested in being a well-oiled machine of a PC, and more interested in exploring some PC oddities, the hit you take from RHD or LA doesn't really matter.

Does playing a Drow without the LA Buyoff rules gimp you horribly?

It's pretty bad, yes. Drow have some amazing abilities, and it's hard to argue that anything less than a +2 LA would be fair, but you'll end up being a weak combat character or a gimped caster. (And there are hidden costs to being a drow. Like, for example, your party cleric failing his SR check when he tries to heal you in combat ... ) A skill-monkey drow would probably suffer the least, because drow abilities are very useful to them.

On the other hand, I played a drow evoker once, and had a fantastic time, so it's really not all about optimization.

 

[Theroc]

Well, I don't necessarily need a "superpowered" character, but I would like to play characters with unique qualities or less common abilties and traits without getting smashed in the face by the rules for being different.

For example: For a homebrew campaign(I didn't discuss LA stuff with the DM yet because I didn't even understand LA, and am still not sure how well I'd be able to explain it to her), I had been considering playing a Doppleganger who tended to pose as an Elven Druid. However, this character would begin as a 1st level druid with ECL 9... and I had also wanted to take the Warshaper PrC for some added flexibility. As a note: The campaign was intended to start with level 8 characters. So, I realized this was impossible once I learned that LA is added to RHD.

My overall concern is less about being optimized as it is about making sure I'm not... suboptimized? I want to make sure I can meaningfully contribute to a group and not end up just being there just 'cuz my suckyness amuses the party.

As for what type of character I'd be going for; it'd either be the doppleganger concept(I don't have access to information on Changelings, no eberron material atm) or a Drow Assassin type character atm. Or something draconic if I can find something that doesn't seem over the top and makes my character more dragon-like. Or a lycanthrope (though the alignment stuff throws me off)

Yeah, I'm scattered. I've been let loose in a candy store(D&D) I've wanted to go to for about... oh... 10 years ish? and now am not sure which candies I'd like or which will make me sick.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

I'd really recommend getting the info on changelings and shifters (from Eberron). They may be in Races of Eberron, too.

Changelings and shifters were actively designed to give the "feel" of playing dopplegangers and lycanthropes in a +0 LA race. Both are, IMO, very well done. Balanced and flavorful.

Otherwise I'd suggest checking in at the Character Optimization boards over at WotC. While CharOp is not my cup of tea, some of the folks over there have a knowledge of rules and rules-lawyery that borders on the mystical. I'm pretty good with the framework of 3.5, but the sheer volume of rules keeps me from being able to see the details that go into character "builds," especially optimized ones. (And a non-gimped RCH/LA character will usually be optimized almost by definition.)

If you say something like, "I'm interested in playing a doppleganger-like druid, and while I don't want to twist the rules until they scream, I'd appreciate any insights that'll keep me from being gimped," they'll run with those parameters. At the very least, you'll emerge from the experience with a solid idea of whether your concept will work or not, and how much rules-raping will be required.

By the way, if your DM were willing to waive one tiny rule -- that once you begin in a monster "class," you must complete it before taking another class -- you could play your doppleganger druid using the rules from Savage Species (though they may need tweaking for 3.5). That rule exists to avoid people deliberately breaking the rules and creating ridiculous characters, but a reasonable compromise (alternate levels) will usually work fine.

 

[Theroc]

Hrm... this is mostly my fault, but my access to sourcebooks is limited, and I am often directed to source materials I can't gain access too.

If the racial information for changelings is in the Eberron Campaign setting book, I may be able to gain access to it, as I believe I saw that at my DM's library(She lives like 80 miles away though).

As for the WotC site, I'm paranoid about the EULA/Terms of Use they have there, continually talking about purchases and such, which was why I kept searching and came here in the first place. Otherwise, I would most definitely take that advice.

And I could likely convince her to change the rule insofar as allowing me to intersperse my 'monster' levels, so long as it didn't unbalance play too much. I don't think she'd be opposed to working out alternatives, although I would most certainly need to discuss this well beforehand as the group involved is large and I'd hate to waste their time.

I appreciate all this advice Jeff. Next time I'm in her area, I'll definitely check into the Eberron books for those alternatives to the LA races.