Monsters as PCs ???

[Starbuck_II]

Have you considered this method:
Races of War (3.5e Sourcebook)/Playing Unusual Races - D&D Wiki

1. Take the Monster's CR and add 1. This is your ECL.

2. Take the Elite Stat Array, and subtract them from the Monster's in-book Stats, taking the highest number from the highest Stat (the 15 from a Succubus' Cha score etc.). The number that's left = the bonus you get for that stat.

Example, Ogre: ECL (3+1)= 4
Normal stats: +10 Strength, -2 Dexterity, +4 Constitution, -4 Intelligence, -4 Charisma.
RoW stats: Str +6, Dex -4, Con +0, Int -4, Wis +2, Cha -2

Well, you get better Wisdom, but lower dex/Str/Con.

Test it out: For 4 Racial HD (instead of class levela) you have a decent brute, but not as strong as a real Ogre but more balanced.

 

[Roman]

For me, the priority order would be:

Epic
Monsters
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Psionics

I am not really interested in purchasing an Asia-themed book.

To make the list of priorities more accurate, it all really depends on what approach Paizo takes to each of the books. The psionics book, for example, would have a much higher priority if there weren't indications that they would be moved to a slot-based system, that dropped them right down on my priority list (and if the indications come to pass, it would place them right into not really interested in purchasing this category).

Epic is the priority for me, simply because the epic game was so poorly done in 3E and I am hoping Paizo does a much, much better job with it. Of course, I could be wrong and Paizo might blow it, but since this was probably the most poorly done part of 3E, Paizo has the greatest room/potential for improvement here.

Playing monsters as PCs, although not perfect in 3E, was workable with the ECL/HD/LA system. Paizo would need to re-assign the LAs to better reflect reality, but the system was mostly fine and I hope Paizo keeps the gist of it, perhaps even borrowing a page from Savage Species and allowing players to gradually advance to the full potential of the monster through monster classes. If different rules were used for the final versions of PC and NPC monsters (as in, the PC monster would not have the same abilities, but would be that monster 'in spirit'), however, that would pretty much make me uninterested in the book.

 

[Jhaelen]

From my poitn of view, I would put them in this order: asia, epic, monster PCs, sci-fi and psionics

My priority list:
1. psionics
2. -
3. monster PCs
4. asia
5. sci-fi

I have zero interest in epic. Aren't level 20 PCs already sufficiently epic?

P.S.: Maybe someone would like to create a poll?

 

[Walking Dad]

Have you considered this method:
Races of War (3.5e Sourcebook)/Playing Unusual Races - D&D Wiki

1. Take the Monster's CR and add 1. This is your ECL.

2. Take the Elite Stat Array, and subtract them from the Monster's in-book Stats, taking the highest number from the highest Stat (the 15 from a Succubus' Cha score etc.). The number that's left = the bonus you get for that stat.

Example, Ogre: ECL (3+1)= 4
Normal stats: +10 Strength, -2 Dexterity, +4 Constitution, -4 Intelligence, -4 Charisma.
RoW stats: Str +6, Dex -4, Con +0, Int -4, Wis +2, Cha -2

Well, you get better Wisdom, but lower dex/Str/Con.

Test it out: For 4 Racial HD (instead of class levela) you have a decent brute, but not as strong as a real Ogre but more balanced.

So, the minotaur above would be in a level 10 group:

Fighter 5 / Minotaur HD 5

Elite Array: 15, 14, 12, 11, 10, 8

Str 19 - 15 = +4
Dex 10 - 12 = -2
Con 15 -14 = +1
Int 7 - 8 = -1
Wis 10 - 11 = -1
Cha 8 - 10 = -2

looks pretty uneven to me...
Also nets a -1 on the ability scores...

 

[Qwillion]

I took the arcana evovled approach of racial paragon levels, with our taurian race and now with giants.

I think a book of AE style monster PCs classes should be alot of fun.

 

[Starbuck_II]

So, the minotaur above would be in a level 10 group:

Fighter 5 / Minotaur HD 5

Elite Array: 15, 14, 12, 11, 10, 8

Str 19 - 15 = +4
Dex 10 - 12 = -2
Con 15 -14 = +1
Int 7 - 8 = -1
Wis 10 - 11 = -1
Cha 8 - 10 = -2

looks pretty uneven to me...
Also nets a -1 on the ability scores...

Off numbers are rounded down so -1 becomes +0.
What you are still Large size (better weapon damage), you have +4 Str, -2 Cha, -2 Dex.

Basically, a 1/2 Orc that is smarter and wiser but clumsy and Stronger (plus Large).

 

[Walking Dad]

Off numbers are rounded down so -1 becomes +0.
What you are still Large size (better weapon damage), you have +4 Str, -2 Cha, -2 Dex.

Basically, a 1/2 Orc that is smarter and wiser but clumsy and Stronger (plus Large).

Perhaps this is false, but I thought the official ruling down (subtracting 10 or 11 from the score and half it) would make this actually worse.

 

[Votan]

It sounds like I'll still be using the Arcana Evolved approach- racial classes- if/when I run Pathfinder.

It is an extremely solid approach (and I think Monte Cook was really sharp for coming up with it). It's major downside is that requires a separate "racial class" for each and every race. But the plus is that you can evaluate these racial classes for balance in a much more organic way than you can an CR+6(which varies in effect across levels -- being impossible at average party level 6, very weak at average party level 7 and possibly very strong at average party level 20).

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

It is an extremely solid approach (and I think Monte Cook was really sharp for coming up with it).

Well, lets be fair...he didn't come up with it, he improved it from Savage Species.

It's major downside is that requires a separate "racial class" for each and every race. But the plus is that you can evaluate these racial classes for balance in a much more organic way than you can an CR+6(which varies in effect across levels -- being impossible at average party level 6, very weak at average party level 7 and possibly very strong at average party level 20).

Its extremely flexible. For instance, you can use the same system to work with templates, especially the powerful ones.

 

[Votan]

Well, lets be fair...he didn't come up with it, he improved it from Savage Species.

Really? Cool, you learn something new every day!

Savage species is not a book I ever owned . . .