Lizardfolk = ECL 4?!?!

[Staffan]

Re: Re: Sorry boys, Grendel is right

Further, I also hope you don't think that a bonus to natural armor is worth 50,000 g.p.'s.
A magic item that casts Barkskin 3 times per day costs less than 5,000 g.p. (restricted to a certain class or somesuch)

That's why using the item creation cost table in the DMG blindly doesn't work. An amulet of natural armor +5 costs 50,000 gp, so that's what you should compare it to.

That said, an item that casts barkskin 3 times per day and gives a +5 bonus to natural armor would cost 25,920 gp according to the item tables, not the 5,000 you suggest. It would also only work for 3 2-hour stretches per day, rather than continuously.

Cost calculation:
Spell level 2 x Caster level 12 x 1,800 gp x 3/5 = 25,920 gp

 

[Zjelani]

Re: Re: Re: Sorry boys, Grendel is right

Like I said above, I largely agree with this. But it is worth pointing out that monster HD provide a lot more than Hit points. They also get better saves, skill points, feats and BAB.

Of course, so do classes. And the classes also get special abilities. So there is no doubt that you are correct, you are just over-stating it a bit.

In addition to special abilities, most monster races have fewer skill points and slower feat progression than PCs of equivalent HD. So on the face of it, "HD = ECL at a minimum" looks like a bad standard. Yeah, there should be some relation, but direct equivalance is probably a bit much.

Perhaps (just to throw out a number) ECL = HD x 4/5 or some such as a minimum might be a better standard. That might better reflect the balance between monster HD progression and class level progression.

Furthermore, even HD between monsters aren't balanced. So to go all out, probably each monster type (Giant, Humanoid, Fey, etc) should probably have some sort of ratio that shows how HD of that type relate to class levels since there is great varation between monster HD. Then factor in ability score increases and special abilities and see how those stack up to class special abilities. Anything extra that goes beyond what a class special ability offers would then increase the ECL beyond that point. (Personally, to get a general number, I create the monster as a PC class with ability score increases and special abilities as class features, and then compare that class against the other classes. It's easier to compare class against class than it is race against class. Then of course, I playtest the hell out of it to fine tune that number.)

Either way, this dialogue is great! I'm glad WotC decided to post their numbers in Dragon and then let the community discuss them and R&D keep working on them before including them all in Tooth & Claw. Kudos to them!

 

[Wolfspider]

A lizardfolk with a +5 natural armor bonus has the equivalent of an Amulet of Natural Armor +5 that can never be taken off or dispelled, and is not spoiled by an antimagic field - unlike your Barkskin casting item, it also never runs out of charges and does not require being "put on" or "casted."

The Amulet of Natural Armor has a DMG value of 50,000 gp. Counting the lizardfolk's +5 natural armor as worth the same amount is actually being generous.

I think that you can start down a slippery slope if you start basing these ECLs off of the gold piece value of magical items that duplicate their powers. For example, a ring of elemental resistance (major) is worth 24,000 gp, and using your rationale, a race with that ability would be "worth" an equal amount. How much gp value would you put on the ability to complete ignore one kind of elemental damage? 50,000 gp? 100,000 gp? That's the ability that half-dragons have. Half-dragons also have +4 natural armor, a value of 32,000 gp. They have an adjustment to Strength that is one and a third times the power of a belt of giant strength +6, listed in the DMG at a value of 36,000 gp. They also have bonuses to Constitution, Intelligence, and Charisma that are equal to the lower grade versions of an amulet of health, a headband of intellect, and a cloak of charisma, another 12,000 gp value total.

As you can see, this kind of accounting can become pretty silly fast.

I will grant you that role-playing restrictions of any kind should not be factored in to ECL. This seems to be a sacred cow of 3rd edition and not likely to be dropped any time soon. However, there are certain things that seem to have been overlooked--like the fact that various horses and mules and other pack animals and other creatures like giant eagles don't have opposable digits and the ability to use most equipment and magical items. Despite these serious restrictions, these creatures have been given high ECLs simply on the flawed premise that base ECL must equal hit dice.

 

[Wolfspider]

Considering that it is inevitable that my lizardfolk druid will be considered ECL 4 in the new Tooth and Claw book and not ECL 2, I’ve done a bit of character creation to show how I will deal with this new situation. You see, my DM is a stickler for the official rules, and once he sees that ECL 4 in print in an official D&D3e book, Sedek will lose two levels as surely as if he’d been drained by some undead nasty.

These are Sedek’s current bare-bones stats:

Sedek the Green Scale
10th level lizardfolk druid (ECL 14)
Strength 16 (+3)
Dexterity 10 (0)
Constitution 14 (+2)
Intelligence 9 (-1)
Wisdom 18 (+4)
Charisma 7 (-2)
Hit Dice: 12d8+24
Hit Points: 76 (average hit points of 4 per hit dice except for level 1 druid, which is maxed at 8)
Skill Points: 48 (+4 to Balance, Jump, and Swim checks)
Natural Attacks: claw/claw/bite 1d4+3/1d4+3/1d4+1

And here is SuperSedek the Green Scale Unbalanced, the character I will introduce to my DM after Tooth and Claw comes out and I have had Sedek retire to some bog somewhere:

SuperSedek the Green Scale Unbalanced
10th level half-dragon (black) human druid (ECL 14)
Strength 22 (+6)
Dexterity 10 (0)
Constitution 14 (+2)
Intelligence 13 (+1)
Wisdom 18 (+4)
Charisma 9 (-1)
Hit Dice: 10d10+20 (average hit points of 5 per hit dice except for level 1 druid, which is maxed at 10)
Hit Points: 75
Skill Points: 78 (boy, I sure am going to miss my bonuses to Balance, Jump, and Swim )
Natural Attacks: claw/claw/bite 1d4+6/1d4+6/1d6+3

(Please let me know if there are any mathematical errors in the above numbers. I don’t have my books with me here at work.)

So, there you go. Two completely equal characters!

Now why would I do such a munchkiny thing? Well, I’m taking advantage of my DM’s insistence that everything be “by the book.” I’m sure he’ll let me create the half-dragon character according to the new rules. Then, I’m hoping that I can show him how broken the new rules are so I can go back to playing just plain ol’ Sedek. Devious, huh?

 

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

Honestly, if you add in the +5 natural armor and the 1 bonus feat, I really don't think your Lizardfolk version has much to complain about. Perhaps a little bit weaker than a L14 human, but not a lot weaker. Not enough to justify +3 ECL.

Add in +4 natural armor to the half dragon, plus a 6d4 line of acid 1/day and you have really made the case that +4 ECL is to low there.

Couple minor tweaks, if you are directly converting, the STR shoudl be 22, not 24 and the Int should be 13 not 11. Also your avgerage hit points are low by 1 point per 2 HD.

 

[Henry]

Now why would I do such a munchkiny thing? Well, I’m taking advantage of my DM’s insistence that everything be “by the book.” I’m sure he’ll let me create the half-dragon character according to the new rules.

Somehow, there's poetic justice in the founding member of B.A.D.D. taking a half-dragon template on his character.

Regarding the Magic item equivalency, In no way would I suggest equating special abilties 1 to 1 for magic items, because the gold piece values are inflated to give characters something to do with their cash. However, do keep in mind the ROCK-BOTTOM FACT that having a Lizardfolk with +5 natural armor is exactly equal to having an undispellable, anti-magic immune Amulet of natural armor +5, and hopefully you will agree that this alone is worth at least a rough .5 ECL all by itself.

Also, keep in mind one thing, this being brought out in your earlier post about not "munchkinizing" your scaly druid: When plotting ECL's for Races, MUNCHKINIZE the HECK out of them. Totally ignore RP restrictions, and conceive to yourself what the most effective character class you could marry with this concept would be, and then think about ECL's. This is what the R&D designers do, I feel sure, looking at David Eckelberry's comments, as well as those of Johnathan Tweet, Monte Cook and others when planning game rules. They break it down as mathematically as possible, and if it comes out too powerful, then they scale it back a bit (pun intended).

Finally, about the half-dragon, I have 2 comments: I would wait for Tooth and Claw before passing judgement about the ECL's therein, and also given all the advantages of a Half-Dragon, he's ought to be worth more than ECL+4 (especially considering the STR bonus, the immunities, the breath weapon and hit dice increases. (Incidentally, shouldn't you only be getting 22 STR instead of 24? 1/2 dragon adds +8, and you should already have +2 from being a lizardfolk.)

 

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

I think half-dragon is a really bad example to try to work with. The total lack of HD makes them hard to balance. In a level 5 party a 1/2 dragon F1 will be in really trouble with his +1 bab (even with the big STR bonus) and only 1HD worth of hit points, low saves, low skills. And it takes a very long time to ever get the second attack per round.

But once you get up to higher levels the loss of HD becomes less of a concern and the template starts to really shine. So +4 may be fine for a lizardfolk, but no flat number really works for a half-dragon.

I had a hlaf-dragon in my game (At +3 ECL) that I watched go from to weak, to (briefly) just right to overly strong.

More simple races (like lizardfolk) do not have these scaling issues. (no pun intended)

Anway, I admit that at +4 ECL the lizardfolk will be slightly weaker. But only slightly, and I think that is a good thing. If lizardfolk were even "just as good" as humans, they would still be more interesting that humans and more players would want to play them. So your character would lose his unique flavor.

 

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

...

then they scale it back a bit (pun intended).

....

HEY!!!!

No fair, you posted your scale pun while I was writing mine.

 

[Voneth]

This is an absurd argument (humorously so!), but it does show the main point well - lizardfolk don't make very good druids, like half-orcs don't make good sorcerers.

Technicaly I am playing a S'ssern Druid, which is the Arcanis version of lizard men. I'm stuck playing single class druid because in Arcanis, the favored class is Ranger! (gotta love being able to chose Human as favored enemy)

Playing druid is fine, Intellegence penalites don't matter much to a Wis based class. And since I had to travel from swamp to forest, I have more excuses for finding and keeping a wider range of Animal Compainions. In fact, all the insect based spell make even more sense coming from a swamp-based caster than from the forest. (mosquitos anyone).

In our year of play as a druid, here are most of my observations. My hit points are lower that Sedeks! I only have 56.

When ever I try to climb walls or something for a better view or to peek inside, by fellow players and DM roll their eyes and then just bust down the door. No one thinks my swim ability is lame, though. The most combat related thing is that our DM loves to swarm the whole party. It's rare that the spell casters don't have someone in their face by round 3. In those cases, my AC was the only thing keeping me alive and able to make Concentration checks cast heals on people.

But in my experience when one is faces with:

Players who are unimpressed with people who pick "wierd" races.

DM's who stick to their plans of using demons and DR critters when none of my Animal Companinons can scratch them (1d8+1 vs. DR 10 = a long day)

A background world where summoning elementals ticks off every elf for miles

I have come to the conclusion that ECLs shouldn't be considered a hard and fast rule even for "offical" rules. (Don't get me started on the DMs I met in these forums who won't touch anything that's not OGL, even for thier private games) A ECL should be considered with the class taken and the game world at large. Heck, in the game I am playing I think Human Druids would need an ECL of -2!

 

[Wolfspider]

I've corrected some of my math. Thanks.

However, do keep in mind the ROCK-BOTTOM FACT that having a Lizardfolk with +5 natural armor is exactly equal to having an undispellable, anti-magic immune Amulet of natural armor +5, and hopefully you will agree that this alone is worth at least a rough .5 ECL all by itself.

I agree completely.

Honestly, if you add in the +5 natural armor and the 1 bonus feat, I really don't think your Lizardfolk version has much to complain about. Perhaps a little bit weaker than a L14 human, but not a lot weaker. Not enough to justify +3 ECL.

Oh, I'm quite willing to see these kinds of points. I'm warming to +4 ECL a bit, although I would rather see a compromise at ECL +3. Mainly my example was to show that ECL 4 for a half-dragon is unbalanced and that the designers need to keep tweaking if they want to produce good ECL numbers.

Somehow, there's poetic justice in the founding member of B.A.D.D. taking a half-dragon template on his character.

Ain't that a fact!