Savage Species- is there something wrong with me!?

[Mercule]

Why do this instead of using time? Well, time is a poor mechanic- and one that could lead to ugly situations.

Fair enough. Some of the classes still don't seem to make sense, even granting that XP is a better mechanic than time.

Trolls without regen (until 3rd?) are one example. Another is playing a Titan starting at size M -- would the other PCs have to change their diapers?

That said, I do think there is a certain playable range for the classes. Usually one or two levels. The idea of starting out as a 1st level Vrock just is absurd.

Am I missing something?

(Really, I'm setting up my objections to be answered. Please do.)

 

[Nifft]

The way I'd deal with aging is simply to say, to the player, "Your ECL will increase when you gain an age-level. This will happen when I tell you it happens. You may add class-levels as you wish, and as your ECL and XP allow."

Then the DM decides when the character gains a monster-level, and the total ECL determines how many XP the PC needs to gain another class-level.

I think that Savage Species is going to be a big help to people who like Planescape-style adventures.

-- Nifft

 

[Intrope]

All I know is that I want my flumph monk, and I want him NOW.

So, would a flumph monk use kumph flu?

I just wish my FLGS would actually get SS in...

 

[Sagan Darkside]

Trolls without regen (until 3rd?) are one example. Another is playing a Titan starting at size M -- would the other PCs have to change their diapers?

In general, I would agree that the system (and my thoughts on the matter) don't work well for all the races. But, as a dm I am not going to open the floodgates for all of them to be an option.

Heh. Perhaps the troll regeneration is a gland that does start working until they are a certain maturity- similar to how I can't stop growing facial hair. I miss my younger days when that was not an issue.

As for the Titan- yeah that is bizarre. I am not too fond of the size change aspect, but I would need to think about it.

The idea of starting out as a 1st level Vrock just is absurd.

Agreed- I have trouble thinking of a lifecycle for a demon. They just are what they are- they don't have a life cycle.

But, perhaps a reverse argument works- the demon is weak at creation, and needs to fight/do nasty deeds to reach its "natural" peek.

It would be similar to a regular, but restricted, class in that manner.

Back to Titans- I need to reread them, but are they celestial beings or are they just super giants?

SD

 

[ColonelHardisson]

I think some people look at the full-strength monsters and ignore the fact that the point of the book is to take the critters from 1st level up to whatever their full-strength CR would be. So far, the monsters don't look overpowered to me - that is, a 1st level minotaur is on an even footing with a 1st level human fighter, more or less, and so on. The book simply aids the DM and players in creating an exotic, non-traditional campaign if they choose to do so. If all it did was toss full-strength monsters out as PC material, that would be one thing; taking those critters from 1st level (or at a higher ECL in some cases) and up is far different.

 

[Sagan Darkside]

Then the DM decides when the character gains a monster-level, and the total ECL determines how many XP the PC needs to gain another class-level.

That is an interesting idea for how to go about it. I will have to make note of that in my book.

SD

 

[Wippit Guud]

Thoughtout history, traumatixing experiences and wars (and the like) have matured 10 and 11 year olds into adult far earler than is normal. Hell, there was a pope who was 9!

The same could be said of monster races... if they're forced to go out and adventure, or run away or some such thing, such experiences tend to mature someone fairly fast.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

The way I'd deal with aging is simply to say, to the player, "Your ECL will increase when you gain an age-level. This will happen when I tell you it happens. You may add class-levels as you wish, and as your ECL and XP allow."

Then the DM decides when the character gains a monster-level, and the total ECL determines how many XP the PC needs to gain another class-level.

definitly the way I'll be doing it. The whole "don't multiclass character & monster classes" thing is good against powergamers, but I just don't game with them.

there will be places where the straight monster class advancement makes sense. Outsiders, elementals, feys to some extent... its fairly reasonable for them to gain power through experience with using power. A 1st level succubus isn't really a true succubus yet - just a nasty little demon with plans. With those sort of characters I might even go a step further and give the option of continuing the monster class - add more spell like abilities that fit the concept, increase DCs and usages of others, grant bonus monster feats, etc. Much more satisfying (and logical) than reaching the height of your demonic powers and then learning your first level spells as a sorc...

Kahuna Burger

[edit - I posted a poll on the character vs monster class issue in the house rules forum, btw]

 

[Drkfathr1]

I think alot of it boils down to the individual DM/Group and their particular style of play. Like a lot of you I have problems with the Monster Classes too. I find it hard to come up with psuedo-realistic reasons why the monster starts out so weak, but within a few adventures has "beefed" up physically without actual character classes. Some monsters obviously work better for this than others...

I love the book overall, I think it has some great rules and provides some very interesting options. I think I'll get a lot more use out of it as a DM than my players ever would, but that was probably the idea all along.

I do have problems with ECL though. PC's are supposed to have a CR equal to their level. So an 8th level Fighter is CR8, so is an 8th level Wizard, or Cleric, or Psion. But a Mind Flayer is CR 8, and is considered a 15th level character before the addition of any class levels? I don't think that works. You can't tell me that the Mind Flayer "Class" is comparable to a low level Fighter, or Sorcerer, or Cleric , or anything else. No attack bonus at 1st level, weak saves, no weapon group proficiencies, no armor proficiencies, one feat, a few skill points, and no special abilities. All it can do is attack with it's tentacles for 1d4 points of damage.

A first level human fighter can take two-weapon fighting, ambidexterity, and wield two rapiers and be more of a threat than a stinking 1st level Mind Flayer.

Okay, enough about the Mind Flayer....

I really did like the book, but I still don't think the ECL's are balanced properly for each monster.

 

[Hardhead]

I really did like the book, but I still don't think the ECL's are balanced properly for each monster.

Yeah, I agree. Some of the ECLs are screwey, definitly. For one thing, they don't take into account that HD is not always a good place to start for ECL.

I mean, cats are ECL +2? Whaaaaa?

Also, I think some of the mosters are just dumb at lower levels. As someone else, Vrocks aren't level 1, ever. The way it works is that when a demon or devil (or celestial or whatever) is "promoted" from an old form to a new, they emerge as a full version of that old form. They aren't "born" as weak vrocks/planetars/whatever.

Also, I agree that many of the creatures just shouldn't be low ECL'd. Titans were a good example. You can get a range out of them, but not down to +0 without absurdity. Start them off at +8 or so, and advance from their. Don't even try lower.

Also, Mind Flayers are definitly messed up. The only real concern, I think, is the Mind Blast and brain eating at will. It'd have been much preferable to limit Mind Blats to some high nubmer per day (say, eight - so for a monster it might as well be at will, but for players it's not). Also, limit brain eating to, say, six brains per eight hours (only so much room in the tummy, after all!)

Do that, and you could knock down the LA by leaps and bounds. maybe as low as +2 or +3.