Savage Species is Broken?

I just had a GM apply a +1 more LA to my monstrous creature (the game is ECL 3) because he "knows Savage Species, and all the Broken stuff in it."

When I asked him what was broken he statted up an anthropomorphic baleen whale with the feral and mineral warrior templates to show how broken Savage Species' progressions are and why monstrous characters overpower phb characters. Is it just me or is there something wrong with this scenario? Particularly since my monster has nothing like that.

What's really odd is this is the second time in a week a GM has told me Savage Species is broken. I always found it broken in that you can hardly build anything that will survive ten minutes in a dungeon. Maybe I'm just no good at min-maxing.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Ya, it can be abused. But lot of things can. It seems the DM heard a few ways it can be and in his brain that now means everything from the book is overpowered. I would ask him specifically what about your character is overpowering and deserves this extra +1 LA. Tell him that if he doesn't like the book he should just not allow it insterad of of doing what he is doing.
 

Yes, Savage Species does have a lot of abusive and unbalanced material (check the Feral template, for one). But, as Crothian said, that doesn't mean your character is necessarily overpowered or abusive. Ask the DM politely to explain what's wrong with the character specifically, rather than focusing on the book.
 


Tauric Medium Scorpion with plans to go into Ranger if the character ever makes it to character levels.

I gave the character a reach weapon (So it can't have an overwhelming full-attack by hitting the same creature with weapon and claws), a low Con and Str (So it's Bonus wouldn't run it's HP or To-hit up past anybody elses), and minimal armor (So the natural Armor wouldn't make it unhittable.). His LA also removes it's poison and most of the Con Bonus (So now the Rogue has more HP). If I'd built a more optimized character I might not be upset but as-is I feel like it's a giant walking bullseye.

He couldn't identify anything on the character that was broken, just pointed to the Feral Whale as proof that the Scorpion is too powerful. I'm just going to play it as he wants it and see what happens, if (As I suspect will happen) the character gets killed in the first battle I'll just roll up a new character that won't set off his GM-sense.
 

Let's see here. Tauric adds all of the abilities of the base creature to the mental stats and skills/feats of the humanoid. So you are basically a medium scorpian with 2 monstrous humanoid hitdice (d8's, full BAB, good fort and will).

So:
+2? Str
+4 Con
+4 Natural Armor
2 Claw attacks (abeit at 1d4)
It also looks like (By the template) you'd keep your poison.
The racial attributes of the humanoid base race
and 2 racial hitdice

I'd say throwing the above onto a human/elf/ whatever would merit +2 LA. For a total of ECL 4 starting at 2 hitdice and no class levels.

I understand your disapointment, you attempted to balance yourself against the race by your own standards and the implication of a 1 LA. Talk to your DM about it.
 


shilsen said:
Yes, Savage Species does have a lot of abusive and unbalanced material.
Shhhhh. I'm playing a Ghaele Eladrin in one of my current campaigns. Don't tell my DM! ;)

...nothing to see here; move along.
 

That's odd I always felt that SS was absurdly restrictive in many ways and the potential abuses were more indicators of its overall failure than anything else. I've found that using its guidelines automatically penalizes non-PHB races to subpar levels and that you can't build certain PHB races without suffering LA using them.
 

There is good material in SS, lots of it. It's just there is ... other stuff, too. Example: One feat, which allows you to use a supernatural ability of a form you change into, is an essential ingredient in creating Pun-Pun (the other is the worst written supernatural ability ever).
 

Remove ads

Top