Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sylrae" data-source="post: 4944799" data-attributes="member: 48520">This isn't a quick and dirty way to guesstimate whether or not a monster isgood for a player at a given level. This is more like, racial class design, to make a race be functionally playable, and be quite sure it's on par with other classes. If you're using pathfinder classes, everything tends to be a little bit more powerful, but once HOW MUCH more powerful is actually calculated, tweaking the racial classes to match it becomes easy. It's more of a "What do you think of the idea of designing monsters like this instead?" Obviously you can't convert every monster on the fly, at least not without some sort of tool/calculator (A tool would make this much easier/faster). That minotaur took me a half-hour.You are quite right on this one that is one of the big problems, and if you look at Upper Krust's LA System, he shows what each Kind of Monster HD is actually worth in terms of levels. Most are worth between .3 and .7 of a level. However, just accurately guaging the power of a monster doesn't necessarily make it playable. But if you want to see accurate challenge ratings and see the system to evaluate them accurately, look at Uppeer Krust's book. Hell, it works great for designing class levels too.That is true, the abilities are often less useful at the uppser levels, but also, at low levels, before you CAN buy anything off, the lost hit points, saves, skills, and feats make you weaker than an equivalent ECL +0 Race, in your frailness particularly.The way it is done in Libris Mortis and Savage species make classes that are worse than standard classes, and they don't have a base-race for an ECL 0 case, so you have to take levels in the class before anything else. Hmm. Sortof. You'll notice the class functions like an actual class, and you don't get screwed out of your skills, feats, and HD like you do in savage species. Additionally, Neither of those allow you to play the monster before you take any of the class levels IIRC. You could Allow players to drop the class levels and take the LA, but the issue I've found is that the LA levels don't tend to be as useful as class levels after a while, and the lost hit points, skill points, and feats can be fatal at low levels. This alternative is to make the monsters be of comparable power as PCs the whole way up.I heard he did something like this, but I haven't seen it to see the particulars. I got the Idea from how they did the core Races in World of Warcraft d20, where the races have a base-race, then a totally optional racial class. Like a Paragon class. then I thought, what if I did regular monsters like that, then it would be easy if one of my players wanted to play a monster (I find they very, very often want to play some monster race or another, I rarely have more than once player who wants to play an LA+0 race in a game). Having seen Upper Krust's CR Guide, it was an obvious way to balance it.I figured I would get some useful critiques, and then take a stab at converting monsters, while leaving the rules on how to design them for if anyone else wanted to use them.Does Arcana Evolved have a Monster Manual that has this kind of race + racial class setup for the SRD Monsters, Or does it just do a few of them?Now that it's a bit better explained, can someone give a critique of the idea, or tell me if monte cook covered it for the SRD Monsters already and saved alot of work?</blockquote>

Verification