Lizardfolk = ECL 4?!?!

[Dr_Rictus]

Lack of speach makes spell casting and communicating with other players tough.

They mention specifically that the listed ECL's for animals assume that the creature has been awakened. That gives them the INT to be viable PC's, but it also allows them to speak.

Other advantages of awakened animals to keep in mind (not that I know whether the listed ECL's are appropriate, not having really thought about it) include that they usually have superior movement rates and modes, superior sense rolls and types, and that in many cases they make excellent spies, since many types can mix inconspicuously with human society and nobody suspects them of being intelligent. Of course, any mid-level druid can get those advantages with wild shape, so the credit they deserve has got its limits.

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

+5 ECL Maybe

Err, do you have any idea what kind of havoc a fighter or barbarian ogre would wreak as a +5 ECL?

He'll have a better melee score and more HP than a human fighter of equivalent level. And of course he'll get the advantage of being bigger.

 

[Michael Tree]

The wizard comparison is meaningless. Why not just cast Hold Monster on the ogre and then dagger him to death?

The wizard comparison is not meaningless. My assertion wasn't that the wizard's spells were more potent than the ogre's physical power, as you're implying, it was that the wizard is simply better in hand to hand combat than the ogre. The wizard in my example had more hit points, a better attack bonus, and the same offensive ability, when just using a single spell. That same wizard would be chopped to pieces by a 9th level barbarian though.

When determining balance, you have to include all factors, including magic spells and magic items. If a single 4th level spell negates all the advantages of the ogre (strength and size), the advantages that the ogre gave up +6BAB, 5 hit dice, and massive numbers of skill points for, then that sacrifice simply was not worth it.

But what about the ongoing adavantages of being massively strong and large. Non-combat brute strength challenges appear all the time in typical games. A Str of 26+ is going to make the other characters (even your barabrian) competely side characters when pure strength is the issue.

So being a good door opener is a balanced compensation for being a physical gimp with less skills than a 1st level fighter? Assuming a roll of 12 in Intelligence, the ogre has 11 skill points. The 9th level half-orc barbarian has 48 skill points. A 9th level human barbarian would have 72 skill points.

In short, the 9th level barbarian, in addition to being superior in combat, is also much more useful outside of combat. The ogre's strength and size gives him advantages to be sure, but they in no way balance out the disadvantages.

Then consider the roleplaying implications of being a STR 26 ogre.

Roleplaying factors are never used to determine balance. All characters have interesting and useful roleplaying implications.

To say that a F1 ogre could not be a fun and useful member of a level 9 party only shows a short-sighted lack of imagination.

Fun, yes. Useful, yes. Balanced, hell no. Being inferior in every single way, except for when using brute strength to open doors, drag stuff, and the like, does not make it balanced.

To say that a half-orc barbarian character should be expected to be only as good at fighting as the ogre character and then be completely overshadowed by the ogre outside of combat in so many occasions is totally unfair to the half-orc.

Yes, IF he is completely overshadowed outside of combat, which is most definitely not the case. Aside from opening doors and carrying stuff, the barbarian is much more useful. He has better physical skills, probably Listen, Wilderness Lore, Intuit Direction, and many other skills, on top of uncanny dodge, and any pretige class or multiclassing advantages he could have taken instead of barbarian levels.

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

4th level psychic warrior dog (awakened)

Dog, small animal

(Built with 32 points, assuming no modifier to INT and -2 to charisma)

STR: 18 (+2 racial + 1 for 4th level)
DEX: 20 (+6 racial)
CON: 18 (+4 racial)
INT: 12
WIS: 14 (+2 racial)
CHA: 10 (-2 racial)

AC: 17 (+1 size, +5 DEX, +1 natural)
Obviously a dog PC would eventually benefit from magic items and special armor. A Doggy studded leather would increase his AC to 20.

HP 5D8+20 (1 HD from dog)

Speed 40 (50 with speed of thought active, 60 with burst)

BAB: +4
Melee: +9 (4 BAB +1 Size + 4 STR)
bite: +10 (weapon focus)

Damage: 1D4+6

Skills (modified by attribute):

Listen +4 (6)
Spot +4 (6)
Swim +6 (10)* (4 from dog, improved with skill from psychic warrior)
Wilderness lore +1 (3)* (+8 racial bonus when tracking by scent, improved cross class with psywar skill points)
Tumble +7 (12)
Balance +2 (7)
Auto hypnosis +2 (4)
Jump +6 (10)

There are some synergy bonus in here that I haven't checked.

Feat:

Scent (form dog)
Weapon focus (bite)
Speed of thought
Psionic Charge
Mental Leap

Power points: 5

Powers:

0
Burst
Talon
Cat fall

1
Biofeedback
Combat precognition


So, with what kind of party should this puppy be adventuring?

 

[Michael Tree]

Re: Why o Why does everyone do there comparisons at Level !?!?

The real issue is at much higher levels, and this is why I suspect the ECLs are so high, as the ECL template/creature has to balanced at very high levels (16-20) as well

When bumped up to 12th level Barbarian the ogre has a much better chance against the 20lvl Half-orc.

This is a good point. However, I don't think the ECL+8 ogre is balanced for that level either. By 20 level, the out of combat advantages of high strength will be less significant, as wizards with telekinesis and shapechange, and direbear druids will be better at it anyway. The ogre will have +5 less BAB (and one less attack), +3 better strenth bonus to attack and damage, slightly less hit points, significantly less skill points, and much weaker class abilities. A 20th level barbarian will have DR4, greater rage without being winded, and is essentially unsneakattackable.

It's totally ridiculous to compare at the compare at the lowest possible level, especially with very high ECLs because of this. Another example is the Half dragon template was viewed by wizards of the coast as to low at ECL +3 and moved up.

It's not totally ridiculous, but it is only part of the picture. It should be considered at the lower levels and at the higher levels both.

I think the source of the problem is, as the game designer a few pages ago said, they started with a baseline of hit dice and went up from there. If the ogre's stat modifiers and size were added to a character without any hit dice, +4 would not be totally unreasonable (though IMO +3 would be better). However, those 4 hit dice an ogre gets are extremely weak compared to 4 class levels. They have a smaller hit die, lower BAB, virtually no skills, and no class abilities. The +3 or +4 ECL of bonuses, combined with 4 very weak hit dice, combine to more like +5 (like in the DMG) or maybe +6, not +8.

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

Yes, IF he is completely overshadowed outside of combat, which is most definitely not the case. Aside from opening doors and carrying stuff, the barbarian is much more useful. He has better physical skills, probably Listen, Wilderness Lore, Intuit Direction, and many other skills, on top of uncanny dodge, and any pretige class or multiclassing advantages he could have taken instead of barbarian levels.

If the barbarian player had wanted to distinguish himself through his skills he'd have been a rogue instead.

Look, the Ogre has +10 to strenght over most other races. That's the lost BAB right there; +5 to hit. He has +4 CON so while he has less HD, everyone of his HD gives more HP than most other PC. The more he'll gain level, the more it'll show.

He does more damage than any other normal PCs. Nothing will change that. He's stronger and uses bigger weapons.

He has reach, natural armor, grapples better and...

Oh and I give up. If you don't see that he's not a midget in combat even at ECL 8 there is not much I can do to convince you otherwise. To me, the stats speak for themselves.

But it is clear to me that with reduced ECL every other melee based PC will feel dwarfed by the ogre in more than one way. And having more skill than him will not make them feel better.

 

[Michael Tree]

If the barbarian player had wanted to distinguish himself through his skills he'd have been a rogue instead.

That doesn't negate the advantage, and a barbarian will still be awesome in combat.

Look, the Ogre has +10 to strenght over most other races. That's the lost BAB right there; +5 to hit. He has +4 CON so while he has less HD, everyone of his HD gives more HP than most other PC. The more he'll gain level, the more it'll show.

The strength bonus is more accurately a +8, because a standard race will gain attribute bonuses at 4th and 8th level. It's +6 better than half-orcs.

I probably overstated my point earlier. I'm not denying that size and strength can be useful, just that they're not +8ECL useful. Size also has disadvantages. An ogre is much easier to gang up upon because of his size, and basically has a "please flank and sneak-attack me" sign painted on his chest. In confined dungeon and interior settings, size is even more of a disadvantage.

If magic is factored in, a +0 ECL fighter can be polymorphed into a troll, hag, or giant to gain almost all the advantages of the ogre at no cost. Magic has to be considered when determining balance. (As an example, magic was what made the 2e thief useless at higher levels. If magic was ignored, the 2e thief would still look useful and balanced).

Ogres have some very nice and powerful advantages, but those advantages are obtainable by others through magic. BAB, feats, hit points, skill points, and class abilities are not obtainable through magic.

But it is clear to me that with reduced ECL every other melee based PC will feel dwarfed by the ogre in more than one way. And having more skill than him will not make them feel better.

It's less clear to me. A barbarian will have better rage and special abilities, as well as more skills and feats. A fighter will have many many more feats, including very powerful ones. A ranger is less potent in combat, but has fantastic skills and good spells, including polymorph self, which gives him all the ogre's advantages. All three also have the option of multiclassing or taking prestige classes that give them greater focussed power. All three will also be much closer to the really nice high level abilities and prestige classes than an ogre.

 

[Archer]

Awakened animals also get +2d8 hps in addition to normal int and +2 cha. The cat is ECL 0 and it would have -8 str, +4 dex and +2 wis, -2 cha. The fact that it is tiny and a cat balance out its better hps and saves than the typical ECL 0 character. I'm sure they will make the cat ECL 2 now however, even though it wasn't very good at ECL 0. What kind of class could the cat have that would be any good? It can't cast spells unless it gets eschew materials and still spell. I guess it could be a cleric or a wizard. Someone would have to carry its spell book around though. With still spell it will be 2 levels behind in spell progression vs. a normal cleric. With a bunch of levels in rogue it could be very sneaky and do enough sneak attack damage that would balance out its very low strength.

About the ogre, skill points can be had through magic and very cheaply I might add. You can buy hps but they are more expensive and you can get compensation for low saves at even more expense. You can't take Large and in Charge unless you are naturally large. Polymorph other will always leave you with -2 to everything from disorientation.

Large and in charge means you can't advance against a creature with reach if it hits you. Combat reflexes with 20 ft reach means 3 attacks to hit and stop someone charging up to your AoO limit. Knockdown means not only are you stopped, you are prone. Imp shield bash mean even if you make it up to the ogre everyone next to you when you are bashed gets an AoO and the ogre can move back for another series of AoO. Boots of striding and springing and a ready action mean a spell caster can't cast spells. +8 on trip checks is near automatic success in opposed tests. When the ogre is ECL 15, he has 8 feats which lets him do all of the above. (My human character will have all the above at level 18 but he's min/maxed too)

 

[reapersaurus]

But it is clear to me that with reduced ECL every other melee based PC will feel dwarfed by the ogre in more than one way. And having more skill than him will not make them feel better.

Well, not to only be contrary, but if you compare an ogre at 9th level to say, the Mighty Contender of Kord prestige class (Dragon 283), the Contender (STR 30 with no magic, 34 if raging) would wipe the floor with the ogre.
Especially if the ogre didn't get the equipment of a 9th level character...

The barbarian comes close to being really strong with his rage ability, but nothing can really come close to the raw power of the ogre.

There are many core race, core class and prestige class combos that will out-melee the ogre fighter.
Add on the fact that the core race dude will have WAY more skills, feats, etc AND will be accepted most everywhere he goes, and I begin to wonder WHO would bother taking monster races as a PC (IF their point was to be min/maxing).

 

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

What about the ongoing DIS-advantages of -2 DEX, -4 INT(NO Skills), -4 CHA(social disaster). Not to mention you are Large.

Party goes into an inn, you bump your head on the ceiling rafters.
Youre skulking(Yeah, Right) down a 10' wide corridor x 10' high corridor, when you see that orc BRB ahead. Hah you cant even swing your Huge GS.
You get knocked unconcious, no-one in the party can move your 500lb+ carcass so you get left behind.

An ogre makes a good fighter, but even there it just takes the fighter template to the extreme.

+5 ECL Maybe

+5 ECL would wreck any reasonable game.

The -2 dex is very minor compared to the other physical bonuses. And the mental disadvantages are not going to be a big deal to the character concept.

The conditional limitations you list are not really appropriate for judging character effectiveness. The correct ECL will should be based on what the character is capable of.