-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Reincarnated as a Centaur - Doing it by the Book?
- Thread starter Sigma
- Start date
Negative Zero
First Post
oh ... yeah ... right ... i knew that 
thanks mike
~NegZ
thanks mike~NegZ
Interpreting Reincarnation
Zerovoid wrote:
It *does* matter. Reincarnated creatures are treated as the spell Reincarnate states, not as the DMG suggests handling creating character monsters. To wit:
They don't change their hit points at all, let alone add four more to their total.
(Try this for fun: kill a 5th-level gnome Wizard with an 18 Constitution (retains HP, spells-in-book as WIZ 5). Reincarnate him. Allow to gain XP and advance from 4th to 5th again. Kill WIZ 5, reincarnate him... and repeat. It's expensive, but the WIZ gets massive HP and two spells out of the deal in exchange for a delay in level progression. And remember, his HP are not modified by the new Constitution - so if he comes back as a human or something with lower Con he retains his old gnome-Con HP.)
I'd keep the ECL the same if you're willing to deal with the imbalance a reincarnated animal or wolverine can introduce. I'm not, so I house-ruled the spell to add ECL (haven't decided if that's a Dragon mag ECL or DMG level adjustment). I know, that puts a damper on using reincarnate. That's why I keep a box of Kleenex nearby at all times.
Not sure about Skills, though. I'd treat this as normal with respect to character level loss.
Mikebr99 wrote:
I think Apok was reading the part in the spell that says:
A badger and wolverine (and most of the other animals there) have sharp digging/tearing claws at the end of non-dexterous fingers. Those aren't hands. Thus, no spellcasting unless they have the Still Spell metamagic feat. Whee!
Ketjak
A Monkey God
Zerovoid wrote:
It *does* matter. Reincarnated creatures are treated as the spell Reincarnate states, not as the DMG suggests handling creating character monsters. To wit:
They don't change their hit points at all, let alone add four more to their total.
(Try this for fun: kill a 5th-level gnome Wizard with an 18 Constitution (retains HP, spells-in-book as WIZ 5). Reincarnate him. Allow to gain XP and advance from 4th to 5th again. Kill WIZ 5, reincarnate him... and repeat. It's expensive, but the WIZ gets massive HP and two spells out of the deal in exchange for a delay in level progression. And remember, his HP are not modified by the new Constitution - so if he comes back as a human or something with lower Con he retains his old gnome-Con HP.)
I'd keep the ECL the same if you're willing to deal with the imbalance a reincarnated animal or wolverine can introduce. I'm not, so I house-ruled the spell to add ECL (haven't decided if that's a Dragon mag ECL or DMG level adjustment). I know, that puts a damper on using reincarnate. That's why I keep a box of Kleenex nearby at all times.
Not sure about Skills, though. I'd treat this as normal with respect to character level loss.
Mikebr99 wrote:
I think Apok was reading the part in the spell that says:
A badger and wolverine (and most of the other animals there) have sharp digging/tearing claws at the end of non-dexterous fingers. Those aren't hands. Thus, no spellcasting unless they have the Still Spell metamagic feat. Whee!
Ketjak
A Monkey God
Zerovoid
First Post
Re: Interpreting Reincarnation
Under the interpretation that I am advocating, if you were a centaur and died, and were reincarnated again as something else, you would not still have the centaur's HD, since they are part of the properties of being a centaur.
Also, since a centaur is ECL +4 (I think), if you died as a 5th level wizard, you wouldn't be able to gain any levels until you had enough experience to reach 10th level. Then you could take a 6th level in wizard or whatever.
But, I suppose that there are problems with doing things this way that are more obvious when looking at a centaur being reincarnated as an elf or something. Also, per the rules in the DMG, a player only gains the HD of their monstrous race if that race has more than one HD. The elf as presented in the DMG is simply a Warrior 1, so no contradiction is introduced by substituting another character class for this one.
All it really means to be a centaur is to have a centaur racial template, which would include things like stat bonuses and natural armor, and to have four levels in the Monstrous Humanoid class. If you think that centaurs have these levels because the centaurs described in the MM already have some fighting experience, then a player reincarnated as a centuar shouldn't have these levels of Monstrous Humanoid, only the centaur stat bonuses. If on the other hand, they have these four levels of Monstrous Humanoid because centaurs are just big and tough, then all centaurs should have them, whether they were reincarnated or not. Maybe a solution would be to simple have the players next four levels be Monstrous Humanoid, so that eventually they will end up as a normal centaur. Then you don't have to figure out what ECL the stats of a centaur are worth without the accompanying HD.
Ketjak said:
Under the interpretation that I am advocating, if you were a centaur and died, and were reincarnated again as something else, you would not still have the centaur's HD, since they are part of the properties of being a centaur.
Also, since a centaur is ECL +4 (I think), if you died as a 5th level wizard, you wouldn't be able to gain any levels until you had enough experience to reach 10th level. Then you could take a 6th level in wizard or whatever.
But, I suppose that there are problems with doing things this way that are more obvious when looking at a centaur being reincarnated as an elf or something. Also, per the rules in the DMG, a player only gains the HD of their monstrous race if that race has more than one HD. The elf as presented in the DMG is simply a Warrior 1, so no contradiction is introduced by substituting another character class for this one.
All it really means to be a centaur is to have a centaur racial template, which would include things like stat bonuses and natural armor, and to have four levels in the Monstrous Humanoid class. If you think that centaurs have these levels because the centaurs described in the MM already have some fighting experience, then a player reincarnated as a centuar shouldn't have these levels of Monstrous Humanoid, only the centaur stat bonuses. If on the other hand, they have these four levels of Monstrous Humanoid because centaurs are just big and tough, then all centaurs should have them, whether they were reincarnated or not. Maybe a solution would be to simple have the players next four levels be Monstrous Humanoid, so that eventually they will end up as a normal centaur. Then you don't have to figure out what ECL the stats of a centaur are worth without the accompanying HD.
Artoomis
First Post
Re: Interpreting Reincarnation
I suggest that reincarnation is poorly written and the intent is to:
Retain your BASE hit points (without Con modifier) and apply the new Con modifer.
Reduce your BASE hit points by one level as well (since you lose a level when you are reincarnated).
There is nothing in errata or the FAQ about this, but I wrote the Sage to see if he supports this view.
By the way, if you do not agree with my view, then the same logic hold for BAB and Saves - they don't go down with the reincarnate level loss, so potentially could just increase with repeated reincarnations and re-leveling back to where you were.
Doing it my way makes more sense and makes it fit within the rest of the 3e system. I suggest that this is the way it was meant to work.
.
.
.
As to the ECL question, it simply does not apply. The spell is clear in how this works. Applying any sort of level or HD adjustment (beyond losing one level) is clearly House Rules. Anyway, for the most part, any increase in power from stats is made up for in:
1. Level Loss (though Raise Dead is the same with no gain in stats).
2. Social acceptance problems.
3. Dungeon Crawl problems (possibly too much weight and/or bulk for narrow corridors, etc.)
4. The chance that you may get worse stats.
5. The best stat boosts (except Centaur, which has its own problems from size, see #3 above) are to creatures without hands - no somatic spells, no wepons in hands, etc.
Of course, how much this affects the character is totally up to the DM.
Ketjak said:
I suggest that reincarnation is poorly written and the intent is to:
Retain your BASE hit points (without Con modifier) and apply the new Con modifer.
Reduce your BASE hit points by one level as well (since you lose a level when you are reincarnated).
There is nothing in errata or the FAQ about this, but I wrote the Sage to see if he supports this view.
By the way, if you do not agree with my view, then the same logic hold for BAB and Saves - they don't go down with the reincarnate level loss, so potentially could just increase with repeated reincarnations and re-leveling back to where you were.
Doing it my way makes more sense and makes it fit within the rest of the 3e system. I suggest that this is the way it was meant to work.
.
.
.
As to the ECL question, it simply does not apply. The spell is clear in how this works. Applying any sort of level or HD adjustment (beyond losing one level) is clearly House Rules. Anyway, for the most part, any increase in power from stats is made up for in:
1. Level Loss (though Raise Dead is the same with no gain in stats).
2. Social acceptance problems.
3. Dungeon Crawl problems (possibly too much weight and/or bulk for narrow corridors, etc.)
4. The chance that you may get worse stats.
5. The best stat boosts (except Centaur, which has its own problems from size, see #3 above) are to creatures without hands - no somatic spells, no wepons in hands, etc.
Of course, how much this affects the character is totally up to the DM.
I agree with artoomis on this one, it makes more sense to apply base hitpoints with no con mod, and then add in the new con. This would make it a lot easier to drop the level, and then apply the new stats.
I still think by the book rules you don't add ECL or anything of the kind. The one thing I would require is some new help with training. A fighter that has been swinging a sword all his life and is now a wolverine now has to learn how to be a better wolveriene in combat. That's not something his fighter training has prepared him for. I would say the fighter would have to find a special trainer (or perhaps a good animal handler) to be able to learn to fight as a wolveriene better. Once he's done that, he can progress just like before, but until then, he can't gain a level no matter how hard he tries.
That could open up some great roleplaying elements, especially if the new wolveriene became the companion of a ranger or something to help him to train
I still think by the book rules you don't add ECL or anything of the kind. The one thing I would require is some new help with training. A fighter that has been swinging a sword all his life and is now a wolverine now has to learn how to be a better wolveriene in combat. That's not something his fighter training has prepared him for. I would say the fighter would have to find a special trainer (or perhaps a good animal handler) to be able to learn to fight as a wolveriene better. Once he's done that, he can progress just like before, but until then, he can't gain a level no matter how hard he tries.
That could open up some great roleplaying elements, especially if the new wolveriene became the companion of a ranger or something to help him to train
