Racial Level Adjustments...think it works?

[irdeggman]

Forget the character receiving the LA for sole consideration.

Instead the factor should be would a player running a human character feel cheated if there wasn't a LA for the "powerful" race that the other player is running?

Would the player with the "weaker" race character feel cheated and left out because the other player's character is dominating the play?

Those are the real things to consider for balance fairness.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I think that the LA/ECL mechanic is fair but flawed- I don't think there are really any guidelines for determining the LA of a creature, so some are over adjusted, some under.

I much prefer the Racial Class method introduced in Savage Species and improved and refined by Monte Cook in his AU/AE game.

None of my players ever pick a race with a level adjustment. For me, playing the race is more important to me than optimization. But nobody ever wants to be a Tiefling, or a Genasi due to the LA.

That wouldn't be me!

I've enjoyed playing Githzerai Monks and other LA adjusted PCs. My issue is that I don't often get the opportunity to do so- most of the DMs in our group won't allow non-PHB races in their campaigns.

 

[Oryan77]

My issue is that I don't often get the opportunity to do so- most of the DMs in our group won't allow non-PHB races in their campaigns.

That sucks. Maybe we can switch players? All of my current group keeps choosing to be humans

I can get away with allowing more races since I run a Planescape game. I allow about 30 extra races and compiled them all in a folder. Multiple times, I've had players still ask me if they can choose a race that I don't have in the book! 30 new races isn't enough? Once a player even wanted me to make up a race just so she could play a race from her favorite MMORPG

 

[Runestar]

What are your opinions about races that give a Level Adjustment or even extra hit dice that cause the ECL to raise? Do you think it is fair or does it seriously weaken the character at higher levels?

Any spellcaster would be screwed in the case of a race with LA (with the possible sole exception being the sylph from MM2, which is ECL7 but casts as a sorc of HD+4 (and if your DM allows, can be advanced all the way from 3 to 9 outsider HD). This also paves the way for free entry into eldritch knight, giving you a caster with effectively full spellcasting progression and fairly good bab/saves (between outsider HD and full bab progression from EK).

Melee classes would be a tad weaker at lower lv (due to LA not granting hp/saves) but should be more or less compensated at higher lv. You will have fewer hp/poorer saves, but better AC/damage and maybe other defenses such as sr or resistances, so it should hopefully even out.

Skill-based classes tend to be given the shaft for any race with racial HD, since that robs them of their full allotment of skill points for their 1st class lv.

So it really depends.

 

[irdeggman]

I much prefer the Racial Class method introduced in Savage Species and improved and refined by Monte Cook in his AU/AE game.

Me too and WotC even posted a bunch in their Savage Progressions articles on their website.

Savage Progressions: Level-Adjusted Races

 

[Shin Okada]

Playing LA races as a spellcaster is usually a very bad option even if they have higher ability score adjustments, at any level tier. And, while some "brute" races work well as a warrior at above med ECL, playing it from the lower level is a kind of self-torture. A Half-Ogre barbarian 10 (ECL 12) is great. A Half-Ogre barbarian 4 (ECL 6) is OK. But a Half-Ogre barbarian 1 adventuring in a 3rd-level party tend to die soon. Very soon.

Still, I tend to agree with the opinion "better err on the side of caution". If players of core race feel cheated, that will be no good for this game.

 

[Shin Okada]

Any spellcaster would be screwed in the case of a race with LA (with the possible sole exception being the sylph from MM2, which is ECL7 but casts as a sorc of HD+4 (and if your DM allows, can be advanced all the way from 3 to 9 outsider HD).

According to the 3.0e to 3.5e update booklet (free PDF), Sylph's LA is +5 while it casts spells as a sorcerer of HD+4. Thus, it still casts spells as a sorcerer of ECL -1.

D&D v.3.5 Accessory Update Booklet

It could be one of the best option for sure as it has fly speed of 90 ft. (good), higher Charisma, unlimited number of Greater Invisibility, Summon Monster VI 1/day. But 5 fewer HDs with -2 Con will make a Sylph Sorcerer really fragile. And being an non-native outsider means it cannot be resurrected by True Resurrection. Revive Outsider still lower one's level by 1.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

It just occurred to me that I misspoke slightly- there is actually on LA race I play quite often- Drow. I have 3 high-level Drow PCs that have been active since 1Ed/2Ed, converted to 3.X- all multiclassed spellcasters.

And I've played a few others besides.

And to be honest, I can't say I've missed those caster levels because I'm having so much fun with the characters themselves.

(My only regret with regards to those old PCs is that I wish I'd had access to all of 3.5 when I did their conversions...)

Playing LA races as a spellcaster is usually a very bad option even if they have higher ability score adjustments, at any level tier. And, while some "brute" races work well as a warrior at above med ECL, playing it from the lower level is a kind of self-torture. A Half-Ogre barbarian 10 (ECL 12) is great. A Half-Ogre barbarian 4 (ECL 6) is OK. But a Half-Ogre barbarian 1 adventuring in a 3rd-level party tend to die soon. Very soon.

Like I said- I don't miss the lost spellcasting levels at all for my Drow.

As for non-casters, I loved my polearm-wielding Dex based Githzerai Monk. Even at 1st level in a 3rd level party, he was a solid combatant and quite durable. He almost matched the party Barbarian for damage output and he seldom got tagged due to his party-leading AC.

 

[Eldritch_Lord]

If LA weren't more-or-less arbitrarily assigned based on the "monstrous-ness" of races (i.e. the less humanoid/core-like/Tolkienesque a race is, the more likely it'll get a higher LA to dissuade people from playing it), I wouldn't mind LA as much; I did a comparison of several monstrous races a while back on the WotC boards which has been lost in the board transition that basically showed that "ugly" monstrous races can take a +1/+2 LA hit compared to more humanlike races of equal or equivalent power. The concept of trading levels for power, though, is a workable one, and once you get past the "pay later for power now" problem it works fairly well.

Racial HD I really dislike; martial characters don't get the class features they need, casters aren't taking LA/RHD races on the whole anyway, and in general I feel the idea is flawed.

 

[frankthedm]

If LA weren't more-or-less arbitrarily assigned based on the "monstrous-ness" of races (i.e. the less humanoid/core-like/Tolkienesque a race is, the more likely it'll get a higher LA to dissuade people from playing it), I wouldn't mind LA as much; I did a comparison of several monstrous races a while back on the WotC boards which has been lost in the board transition that basically showed that "ugly" monstrous races can take a +1/+2 LA hit compared to more humanlike races of equal or equivalent power. The concept of trading levels for power, though, is a workable one, and once you get past the "pay later for power now" problem it works fairly well.

It can look like ECL seems to just be there to make sure the Fellowship of the Ring races are not outshined by the oddball races. But a lot of those less humaniod have extra abilties that were added with their use as a monster, not player in mind.

The big thing with ECL is when Level adjustment is set based on a creature already written out as a monster, NOTHING gets taken off to reduce the ECL, it seemed wotc designers did not have that option, they had to work with what was in the MM. Thus a Hobgoblin gets a +1 LA solely because he has two ability score bumps, but no ability score penalties.

BUT if writing a new race to have an ECL, they get to add just enough stuff to make the ECL worthwhile, without adding that "certain element" which would mandate another point of crippling level adjustment. Example: Poison Dusk Lizard folk and Goliath are LA+1, but get far more than a LA+1 Hobgoblin does.

It is kinda like LA's are round holes, but MM monster stats are mostly square pegs or rigged polyedrals. if Monster manual Monster A has a special ability that makes it not fit the round hole of LA+2. it automatically got bumped up to LA+3.

Racial HD I really dislike; martial characters don't get the class features they need, casters aren't taking LA/RHD races on the whole anyway, and in general I feel the idea is flawed.

Unfortunately just dropping racial HD can be a bad idea since sometimes it looks like LA numbers were set expecting the character to be eating those sub par HD.

Does it REALLY hurt the game that much to just ignore the racial hit dice? I can't imagine it breaking the game to allow four levels of fighter, one LA for gnoll and just ignore the Racial HD completely.

LA and HD go hand in hand, dropping the HD can overpower the character depending on the creature in question. A creature with a bunch of abilities, but also a high HD would have a lower LA than a creature with those same abilities but no LA. It would be akin to giving a character all the abilities of a rogue 5 without the 5 hit dice in those instances.

Let me rephrase that for you.

Would it really hurt the game to ignore the 6 racial HD of a Minotaur and let the character replace them with Ftr levels at the low, low, cost of +2 LA?

Yes, yes it would.

However, gnolls are probably ok, if the GM wants to rewrite them as 1 HD humanoids.

Gnolls.. not so big an issue. They're not exactly powerhouses to begin with. Rather nancy, actually.

Other races? Yes. Definitely could hurt the game.

As far LA goes, one really good suggestion Klaus had was Turn nonexistant LA levels into Commoner levels.