D&D (2024) Level adjustment from 3.5 and how to handle it in 5(.5)E?

[Horwath]

3.5e had one solution for (over)powerful races/species to be playable to PCs and that was level ajdustmet,

for those who do not know, level adjustment of +1 meant that if you were 2nd level PC with level adjustment +1 you were counted as 3rd level for gaining XP and level progression.
you simply had one level less than everybody else.

this kind of sucked but it was a solution if someone wanted to play a powerful species.

maybe similar can be done in 5E, but wit little less penalty.

I.E: at 2nd level you MUST take "species" multiclass level.
if we wanted to play more powerful aasimar, that has more celestial power, it would come with +1 level adjustment, like in 3,5e

player then when advancing to 2nd level gain 1st level of Asimar level, this might also go into version of racial paragon levels from 3.5e.
this level would be d6 HD, that means +4 HP +1 Con mod and absolutely nothing of features, but your character would be 2nd level like everyone else, just multiclasses Class X 1 / Aasimar 1

other solution would be that you would play a normal aasimar as described and get extra features if and when you take "racial paragon" levels.

OFC, we could have current solution of species specific feats that eat up your precious feat slots.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

Besides the fact that 5e seems to be getting rid of species traits, lots of people don’t use xp much anymore for levelling so level adjustment might not matter as much.

I’d be more inclined to use extra features when you take a racial level and it comes with HD. Essentially, it’s its own class.

 

[Horwath]

Besides the fact that 5e seems to be getting rid of species traits, lots of people don’t use xp much anymore for levelling so level adjustment might not matter as much.

it would still matter, no matter XP awards or milestone leveling, if you have +1 LA you have one less level than others in the party but you are counted as the same level

I’d be more inclined to use extra features when you take a racial level and it comes with HD. Essentially, it’s its own class.

That would fall then under "racial paragons" then.

 

[Willie the Duck]

I always had great sympathy for the devs trying to implement LA, but at the end of the day I always thought it was a flawed mechanic. Being 1 (or 2, or 8) level behind the rest of the group differs in consequence at level 1 than it does at level 13. Likewise, the benefits of (ex.) being size L or wings or some spell-like abilities will differ if you are playing a barbarian or a wizard; as will the cost of being a level behind. Affixing a formula to the process gives the false sensation of rigor that did not reflect the reality (a common complaint about the formulas in 3e).

In the end I think it might be better to make a downgraded version of the species that can fit in the existing species design paradigm, turn it into feats, or bite the bullet (acknowledge that your solution won't be formulaic) and design a custom race-as-class or race-as-class-archetype to represent the specific thing someone is trying to play.

 

[J-H]

LA was too flawed. 5e is more homebrew friendly, and I think it's up to the DM to make adjustments. Since the space between the power floor and the power ceiling is substantially lower, I'd probably homebrew things.

Someone wants to play an troll or ogre? Ok. +4 str, Large, -2 Dex, +2 Con, -2 Int, -2 Cha, and magic items don't automatically resize for you. You have to find someone to do that, or use a conventional greatsword as only a longsword. If you're a troll, regenerate PB hp at the start of your turn as long as you are above 0 hp and not incapacitated and haven't taken fire or acid damage.
You gain some reach and size advantages, but aren't really that much better off in total stats than anyone else, and there's a long-term questing hook if you find any magic armors. Troll gets free healing, but at 5th level in a 3 round combat that's only worth 15hp. It's a bit better than a feat for a very one-note stat distribution.

Done. Could probably be fine tuned but it took little time to write up.

 

[Quickleaf]

If it’s going to be a rigorous system - and not an ad hoc “let’s make it work” spirit of cooperation - then a class based system is what makes sense to me. I believe Grim Hollow has examples of this approach.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I'm planning on eventually coming up with some way to convert monsters into PCs. My thought is that you start with a monster and it counts as a certain level. Then you can add class levels or maybe more monster levels. Have to figure out what changes are made when it converts to PC.

I'm not primarily talking about lower CR things like playing an ogre. I'm talking about a full fledged adult dragon, or medusa, or mind flayer that starts with all the hit points and features from the MM and then goes from there as part of a monster campaign. There is no weakening monsters--you just can't play them until the campaign level is at least as high as the monster.

The biggest problem I've had with it is how to accomplish both of my goals:

1) Meaningful character customization and advancement
2) Fits the general 5e style of how monsters work

In 3e it wasn't terribly rare to run into NPC monsters with class levels. Having a medusa that was also a 7th level sorcerer, or a mind flayer with 13 psion levels are things that happened in adventures and settings. In 5e...we don't see that.

5e occasionally gives NPC monsters some extra features to their statblock (this chromatic dragon gets the change shape ability like a metallic, this storm giant casts wizard spells much like an X level wizard), but just adding on hit dice and class abilities doesn't happen.

If I were to let it work like 3e, I'd feel like I were changing the way the world works and should start making NPC monsters like in 3e, or I'm saying PC monsters are really super-duper, on a whole different plane, exceptional. That PC isn't just an adult bronze dragon with a little higher Wisdom score, they also have 7 layersbif ranger stacked on, while no monsters are like that.

So, basically, the MM dragons become just "basic" dragons, while advanced versions apparently exist, but since I don't want to mess with it the only one ever seen is the PC.

And besides the weird rarity issue, all dragons really should be awesome. You shouldn't have any boring standard great worms compared to the extra special ones. I don't want a PC dragon to be substantially better than an NPC dragon. But how do I provide meaningful customization and advancement without doing so. (I'm using dragons because they are an excellent example.)

The idea I'm currently toying with is to kind of figure out what the stat block would look like for an advanced NPC monster of a particular type. As much as possible, this means finding actual ones that already exist in the game. See what sorts of features are and are not given. See what the most powerful one looks like. Then find ways for PCs to advance within that framework.

So maybe a PC giant or dragon, can only gain levels in certain classes (or a monster-specific version). They don't get any hit dice unless the published advanced monsters did, but they probably get some features with each level. These could include levels of spellcasting, special abilities (maybe treated as feats), and attribute increases if the advanced monsters had better stats.

For initial customization, rather than point buy with ability score adjustments, something more like you take the stats from the MM but can move some up and others down using a system similar to point buy, but with limited range. You probably can't raise a giant's strength by much (those strength scores are strongly associated with specify giant species) if any, but you could drop their one or two of their stats by a few points and raise there wisdom a bit to let them be better with the cleric spellcasting you are giving them.

You can probably pick some extra languages or tools, and swap some spells. Maybe pick up weapon or armor proficiencies. The minor stuff that could be assumed the monsters in the MM might actually have but it didn't make it to the statblock because it wasn't relevant for encounters (tools, background features, etc) could be added on, while other stuff would likely need to be swapped for something the monster already gets, and should probably be a bit unfavorable except when considered in proper context. Losing 4 points of physical stats for 2 or 3 points of Wisdom for example. Good for your clericy giant, but there is a reason typical giants have their stats where they are. If course, when we convert the monster to an equivalent class level, that's almost always going to be a higher level than its CR, so the proficiency bonus will be higher for the PC class conversion version.

For something more like an ogre, I think it could be a mix between that and just adding class levels, since even in 5e having an ogre that's also a 10th level barbarian wouldn't feel too terribly out of place, even if they haven't really published them.

Probably still have a more restricted way of determining ability scores, and have your initial levels overlap/replace rather than just adding to the monster. I'm not sure what to do with max level characters. For some monsters, they absolutely should be able to have the equivalent of 20th level class features and extra monster power and hit points on top. For others, like ogres, it seems like maybe their monster levels should be at least partially included in a max of 20 limits. Should an ogre 20 th level barbarian be more powerful than a half-orc 20th level barbarian ( if played alongside each other that would mean the half-orc has advanced through epic boons to be the same XP total)? Or should they be limited to a 17th level barbarian with ogre counting as 3 of their allowed levels? The latter feels a little better to me.

Anyway, it's a tricky mess, but I think can still be worth coming up with a system for, because it can enable fun campaigns.

 

[Kobold Stew]

Level Adjustment was the subject of my first post to these boards! I have strong views!

The LA system in 3.5 was robust, but it was implemented alongside racial hit dice (= effectively default levels in "humanoid"), and that gave two dials to adjust, not just one. In theory that was good, but in practice most of the

(racial hit dice) + (level adjustment)

numbers were back-of-the-napkin approximations, and there were some egregious errors that were not easily corrected (in part, because errata dissemination online was not yet practicable and in part because the design teams have always under-theorized monsters-as-PCs.

And so, e.g., to play a gnoll not only was there a +1 LA but there were also two levels of humanoid, which meant a level 1 gnoll ranger was pegged at a level 4 human ranger, but with one fewer hit die, meaningfully fewer skills, etc. Had there been wider playtesting, or some checking for what it means when you start combining these two variables, the LA system might have found greater purchase.

 

[jmartkdr2]

I’d do a variation of paragon classes, except that you’d start with levels in [species] and multiclass into regular classes, rather than what’s described in the poll.

IE if we’re giving centaurs all the physical benefits and no mental penalties (because why would Mentor or Chiron have mental penalties?) then you’d just start as a level 1 centaur, and need to take the second level of centaur after that, and need then you can start taking levels of fighter or whatever.

The main issue with 3.5 level adjustment is that it left you a few hit dice behind - generally not a problem with a +1 level adjustment but anything higher would create issues where you have far too few hit points for your ECL.

 

[J-H]

I recently did a game where I had an adult silver dragon character. I ended up running it with the Silver Dragon statblock + feats/ASIs/class features for a 15th level storm sorcerer, but no extra HP.
The sorcerer levels added versatility but did not appreciably increase damage.

That's on the high end of the power scale, though...