[Savage Species]Half-ogre overpowered??

[Pax]

But why is the determination of ECL always based upon a similar front line fighter type? Against a nimble fighter or a fighter/rogue, the half-ogre's reach advantage is lessened, and sometimes negated. What if the half-ogre is fighting a dwarf, halfling or gnome? The half-ogre's size starts to work against him even further. ECL+1 seems just fine now.

It's not.

The Acid Test isn't "which of these two would win in a fight" but "is there a clear winner, or is the choice betweenthese two pretty much a toss-up".

If we were comparing the Lich, for example, to non-Lich characetrs, the comparison would be for Cleric, Wizard, or Sorceror -- the best class for Lich.

For a Half-Ogre, with high Strength and Constitution, reach, and natural armor as his "hallmark" elements ... a Tank-style fighter is his best type.

A high-dexterity template ("Winged", for example), or race, would probably look at a Rogue, or possibly an agility-based fighter.

Something high Wisdom, would look at divine casters, especially clerics.

And so on.

IOW, it's not "which character would deeat the other" ... it's "given a chocie betweent he two, do you have to actually THINK about which one you want to play ... or is there such a wide advantage you'd almost NEVER choose one or the other, when building a characetr to this specific theme" ...

... so when building a Half-Ogre, whose BEST them is "big, heavy TANK" ... you compare it to tanks. Look at where it's BEST, and see if it's an actual choice, or a "no-brainer".

If one point of difference straddles the "no brainer" line exactly -- IOW, +2 is a bit too high, and +1 is a big too low ... I think it's a GOOD idea to err in favor of the players. The GM, after all, can simply alter his or her encounters, to slightly water down the powerful-ECL character and bring everyone back into balance. (This is where RP penalties come into play ... a Half Ogre is probably more likely to be attacked on sight by the town guard at the GATES, than get pleasant service at ain inn in the center of town ...).

Nothing can ever be PERFECTLY balanced; the goal is to get CLOSE to that, and then accept you can't get any better ...

 

[Quinn]

Hmm, I usually look at what effect a class or a race will have on my overall campaign, and whether I can provide an appropriate challenge without making it seem that I'm trying to stack the deck against the PC. Acid test aside, what is going to have the biggest impact on the race (as far as being ECL+1 vs. ECL+2) is how the race is treated within the campaign. If the Half-Ogre receives the same treatment as a Human or an Elf, then a major disadvantage has been removed. It's not as straightforward as boiling everything down to the numbers, but it's no less important.

 

[Hardhead]

If one point of difference straddles the "no brainer" line exactly -- IOW, +2 is a bit too high, and +1 is a big too low ... I think it's a GOOD idea to err in favor of the players. The GM, after all, can simply alter his or her encounters, to slightly water down the powerful-ECL character and bring everyone back into balance. (This is where RP penalties come into play ... a Half Ogre is probably more likely to be attacked on sight by the town guard at the GATES, than get pleasant service at ain inn in the center of town ...).

The problem with erring on the low side is that it means that exotic races will be better choices for the players. I don't think the standard PHB races should be made obsolete by "power creep."

And the dumb thing is, there's no reason the H/Ogre should stradle the line. It wasnt' a previously existing monster they tried to assign an ECL for. It was designed from the ground up. They could have made it a bit more powerful and put it more firmly in the ECL 2 category. Or they could have designed it to be a little less powerful and more firmly in the ECL 1 category. But besides that, yeah, I think they're a "no brainer at ECL 1. Compare to characters with a 16 strength before racial adjustments:

A second level half-orc fighter would have an attack roll of +7. (+4 strength, +2 BAB, Weapon Focus). The half-Ogre would have an attack of +7 (+6 str, +1 BAB, Weapon Focus, -1 size).

The half-orc deals an average of 8.5 damage (1d8+4 damage with his longsword). The half ogre deals an average damage of 13 (2d6+6) with his greatsword he wields in one hand.

The half-orc has one more feat.

The half-ogre is unaffected by spells and effects that only work on medium sized humanoids, such as Charm and Hold Person.

The AC of the half-orcis 21 (full plate armor, large steel shield, 12-13 dex). The Ogre has an AC of 23 (full plate armor, large steel shield, +4 nat armor, 10-11 dex, -1 size). It would be one higher if the player had the brains to put a 14-15 into their dex before racial adjustments, or they used the new armor from Arms and Equipment that proveded a +9 armor bonus and a max dex bonus of +0.

The half-orc has a reach of 5'. The half-ogre a reach of 10'.

The half-orc, with a con of 10, has 14.5 hit points on average. The half-Ogre has 11.

So, the Ogre looses out slightly in HP (but beats him soundly in AC, so that should even it out, and as levels progress, he'll catch up and pass the half-orc's HP due to the con bonus). He'll be either one feat behind, or no feats behind, alternating every other level (so, he looses half a feat, on average).

I think that's definitly a no brainer. If he was ECL 2, he'd fall one more HD behind, have one less to-hit than the half-ogre, and be one more feat behind him. He'd still have a better AC, damage, immunities, reach, ect. His HP would still eventually catch up due to the CON bonus. At this point, I still think the H/Ogre would be better, to be honest, but then I'd at least be thinking about it. So ECL 2 sounds good to me.

 

[Pax]

The problem with erring on the low side is that it means that exotic races will be better choices for the players. I don't think the standard PHB races should be made obsolete by "power creep."

I know people just HATE to hear this, but -- most exotic races wil have RP drawbacks, due to that VERY element: they are exotic. Many of them hideously so (literally).

And the dumb thing is, there's no reason the H/Ogre should stradle the line. It wasnt' a previously existing monster they tried to assign an ECL for. It was designed from the ground up. They could have made it a bit more powerful and put it more firmly in the ECL 2 category. Or they could have designed it to be a little less powerful and more firmly in the ECL 1 category.

I won't argue with you there. A touch less Strength (say +4), cut the Natural armor in half, maybe a Wisdom penalty ... that'd cut the legs out from under the Half-Oge, and I doubt many people woudl argue against it being ECL+1, then.

But besides that, yeah, I think they're a "no brainer at ECL 1. Compare to characters with a 16 strength before racial adjustments:

A second level half-orc fighter would have an attack roll of +7. (+4 strength, +2 BAB, Weapon Focus). The half-Ogre would have an attack of +7 (+6 str, +1 BAB, Weapon Focus, -1 size).

I daresay, there are better feats to play to the Half-Ogre's abilities than Weapon Focus. "Large and In Charge" perhaps.

Also, you're supposed to use <b>average attributes</b>, not any other number.

So your Halforc has +4 to hit (+1 strength, +1 focus, +2 BAB); yoru halfoge has +3 or +4 to hit (+3 strength, +1 focus, -1 size, and maybe +1 focus).

The half-orc deals an average of 8.5 damage (1d8+4 damage with his longsword). The half ogre deals an average damage of 13 (2d6+6) with his greatsword he wields in one hand.

A greatsword which cost him nearly four times as much as the half-orc's longsword -- prices straight out of the PHB. Not to mention his armor costs the halfogre more, too (size large).

And again, average attributes: halforc, 1d8+1 is 5.5; halfogre 2d6+3 is 10. Still only 4.5 ahead, but let's keep this all down to average-stat-levels.

The half-orc has one more feat.

The half-ogre is unaffected by spells and effects that only work on medium sized humanoids, such as Charm and Hold Person.

And dwarves get bonusses against him. Gnomes too IIRC.

The AC of the half-orcis 21 (full plate armor, large steel shield, 12-13 dex). The Ogre has an AC of 23 (full plate armor, large steel shield, +4 nat armor, 10-11 dex, -1 size).

At double cost for armor, for Large creatures (PHB page 105, sidebar) ... the Half-Oge isn't going to be wearing full plate armor at ECL2. No way, not by a LONG shot (we're talking 3,000gp of armor ... the Half-Orc coudl get +1 Full Plate for less!).

ECL2 characters start with 900gp (DMG, page 43-ish). 50 for sword, 50 for "gneric adventuring sundies", say 50gp for a few day's pocket money and/or rations. That'd leave 650gp ... not even enough for half-plate; our Halfogre is only wearing Banded Mail ... 2 AC lower than your list, costing him 500gp.

Of course, the halforc can only afford Half-plate himself. Fair's fair.

So our AC comparisons are:

Half-orc, AC 19 (halfplate, large steel shield, all attributes average. Costs him 620gp; with weapon, that means he's spent 635gp so far.

Half-ogre, AC 21 (large banded mail, large steel shield, natural armor, large size, DEX of 8 - average for the race). Costs him 580gp; with his weapon, 630gp.

With that other feat, btw, the Halforc could pick up Dodge, and get another point of AC.

It would be one higher if the player had the brains to put a 14-15 into their dex before racial adjustments, or they used the new armor from Arms and Equipment that proveded a +9 armor bonus and a max dex bonus of +0.

All acid tests are done at average stats --- 10's and 11's. On all sides.

The half-orc has a reach of 5'. The half-ogre a reach of 10'.

The half-orc, with a con of 10, has 14.5 hit points on average. The half-Ogre has 11.

The halfogre, with one level of Fighter, gets all of 11HP, true.

The Halforc gets 10, +1d10 -- averaging 15.5hp. Where you got 14.5, I don't honestly know -- a single d10 averages to 5.5 per level, and first level HP are of course maximum. Thus the ORc has about 4.5 more hitpoints -- an entire pre-strength Longsword blow, or slightly more than one MM hit (feasible at this low level).

So, the Ogre looses out slightly in HP (but beats him soundly in AC, so that should even it out, and as levels progress, he'll catch up and pass the half-orc's HP due to the con bonus). He'll be either one feat behind, or no feats behind, alternating every other level (so, he looses half a feat, on average).

I don't think 1 or 2 points of AC is "soundly beating" anyone or anything.

I think that's definitly a no brainer. If he was ECL 2, he'd fall one more HD behind, have one less to-hit than the half-ogre, and be one more feat behind him. He'd still have a better AC, damage, immunities, reach, ect. His HP would still eventually catch up due to the CON bonus. At this point, I still think the H/Ogre would be better, to be honest, but then I'd at least be thinking about it. So ECL 2 sounds good to me.

You didn't look fairly and accurately at the comparison, IMO. Please look again; being Large has BAD things as well as good -- armor cost being a big one.

To close, consider this as well: in a melee, who is going to attract ATTENTION, the generic-gumby halforc fighter ... or his BIG halfogre buddy?

Answer: the halfogre. He'll get attacked slightly more often, too.

 

[Endur]

Half Ogre Dominates at ECL +1 or +2

Actually, the Half Ogre is awesome at ECL +1 or ECL +2.

Size and strength makes the Half Ogre a devestating grappler. As soon as the Half Ogre succeeds in a grapple attempt, the human fighter is in deep trouble.

Because I modified the scenario by taking into account that the ogre can't afford the equipment given (lowered his AC) and the fighter has 4 more feats than shown (upped his AC and hp) using those revisions the fighter lasts one more round than the ogre, and therefore consistently wins the fight.

That's the ogre's best category, and he's losing at ECL +2. Therefore it's too high.

PS

 

[Hypersmurf]

All acid tests are done at average stats --- 10's and 11's. On all sides.

What an odd concept. Do they give a Behind the Curtain rationale for that?

Since you're balancing them for use as PC races... shouldn't the balance test be done with a Standard Array?

-Hyp.

 

[Pax]

Hyp, that only brings in questions of where the high numbers should be assigned, instead of the low numbers. Theoretically at least, all characetrs benefit roughly the same form better-than-racial-average stats.

Do you put the 15 in Dex, to offset the Halfore's penalty? Or in Strength, to play to it's strengths? Does putting the 15 in strength benefit one or the other character more, or less?

Etc, etc, etc.

Average attributes for race is as vanilla, no-decision-making fair as it gets.

 

[Hardhead]

All acid tests are done at average stats --- 10's and 11's. On all sides.

I just read through the Acid Test section of SS again, and I don't see that mentioned anywhere, would you please cite a page number?

A greatsword which cost him nearly four times as much as the half-orc's longsword -- prices straight out of the PHB. Not to mention his armor costs the halfogre more, too (size large).

I think the cost of a basic weapon isn't a very big deal.

ECL2 characters start with 900gp (DMG, page 43-ish). 50 for sword, 50 for "gneric adventuring sundies", say 50gp for a few day's pocket money and/or rations. That'd leave 650gp ... not even enough for half-plate; our Halfogre is only wearing Banded Mail ... 2 AC lower than your list, costing him 500gp.

Of course, the halforc can only afford Half-plate himself. Fair's fair.

So our AC comparisons are:

Half-orc, AC 19 (halfplate, large steel shield, all attributes average. Costs him 620gp; with weapon, that means he's spent 635gp so far.

Half-ogre, AC 21 (large banded mail, large steel shield, natural armor, large size, DEX of 8 - average for the race). Costs him 580gp; with his weapon, 630gp.

Right, either way he beats the H/Orc. And the armor cost only comes into play at low levels, anyway. In a few levels, when they've picked their armor to suit their dex modifier, the H/Ogre is going to have a +3 bonus on the H/Orc, assuming his dex isn't actually in the negatives (which isn't too hard to do).

The halfogre, with one level of Fighter, gets all of 11HP, true.

The Halforc gets 10, +1d10 -- averaging 15.5hp. Where you got 14.5, I don't honestly know

Probably a typo.

I don't think 1 or 2 points of AC is "soundly beating" anyone or anything.

+3, which is how far the Ogre will be ahead of the H/Orc once he picks up the appropriate armor, is. +3 AC is a lot, IMO.

To close, consider this as well: in a melee, who is going to attract ATTENTION, the generic-gumby halforc fighter ... or his BIG halfogre buddy?

Answer: the halfogre. He'll get attacked slightly more often, too.

Which, if I was the normal fighter, would annoy me. The Half-Ogre is better, deals more damage, and is more feared by all the foes the party faces. God, that'd get on my nerves real quick.

Anyway, even though you disagree with me, I still think your comparison shows the same thing mine did. The H/Ogre is the mac daddy of combat at LA +1.


- Z a c h

 

[Pax]

I just read through the Acid Test section of SS again, and I don't see that mentioned anywhere, would you please cite a page number?

Sure -- every page where they go through an Acid Test. Do you see them assigning non-average stats to any of them? I don't.

And as I said to Hyper: assigning non-average stats only brings in questions of how is or is NOT best to arrange those attributes for a fair comparison.

I think the cost of a basic weapon isn't a very big deal.

When the differecne is between 15gp (longsword) and 50gp(greatsword) ... hey, 35gp is more than two extra longswords.

Right, either way he beats the H/Orc. And the armor cost only comes into play at low levels, anyway. In a few levels, when they've picked their armor to suit their dex modifier, the H/Ogre is going to have a +3 bonus on the H/Orc, assuming his dex isn't actually in the negatives (which isn't too hard to do).

What the half-ogre will or will not do in a level, or two, or five, or a hundred, is irrelevant. Right now the Halfogre is at best 2 AC better than the Halforc.

+3, which is how far the Ogre will be ahead of the H/Orc once he picks up the appropriate armor, is. +3 AC is a lot, IMO.

See above, and reread the very first acid test in SavS; they go at length into the concept of not being able to balance things at all levels, and so, only the very first level you can play a creature is examined.

Which, if I was the normal fighter, would annoy me. The Half-Ogre is better, deals more damage, and is more feared by all the foes the party faces. God, that'd get on my nerves real quick.

Hmm, in my case, hey -- someone else wants to take the heat, that's their problem.

Anyway, even though you disagree with me, I still think your comparison shows the same thing mine did. The H/Ogre is the mac daddy of combat at LA +1.


- Z a c h

"Mac daddy", no. Has an edge, yes -- I've never disputed the Halfogre was a strong +1.

But it's a weak +2.

 

[Forrester]

What the half-ogre will or will not do in a level, or two, or five, or a hundred, is irrelevant.

Why in the hell is it irrelevant? Just because the "acid test" in Savage Species (a book I am regretting purchasing more and more) only uses the very first level as a comparison doesn't mean that the other levels shouldn't be considered. Duh.