Wacky HD/ECL problems

J Lloyd

First Post
An interesting discussion of Hit Dice and Effective Character Levels for nonstandard character races is given in the Epic Level Handbook on page 155. In the discussion, the book reads,

When creating a character using a nonstandard race, add that race's level adjusments to the character's class level (or levels) to determine its actual character level. In this special circumstance, the character level is now referred to as effective character level (ECL).

Then I noticed the passage in the Player's Handbook on page 159 that states,

Hit Dice: The term "Hit Dice" is used synonymously with "character levels" for effects that affect a number of Hit Dice of creatures. (Creatures with only Hit Dice from their race, not classes, have character levels equal to their Hit Dice.)

Using a winterwight from the Epic Level Handbook, we have a monster that has a CR 23, 32 Hit Dice, and an ECL of +25.

According to the Core Rules now, if a nonclassed winterwight were attacked with a spell that affected Hit Dice, the winterwight would be said have 32 HD. If the winterwight picked up one level of any other class, the classed winterwight the next time around would be said to have 26 HD.

Has (why has, how has) the ontology/essence of the monster changed by the simple achievement of skill and ability?

How would you remedy this seeming inconsistancy?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

J Lloyd said:
According to the Core Rules now, if a nonclassed winterwight were attacked with a spell that affected Hit Dice, the winterwight would be said have 32 HD.

Yup.

J Lloyd said:
If the winterwight picked up one level of any other class, the classed winterwight the next time around would be said to have 26 HD.

No. It would have an ECL of 26, but it would have 33 Hit Die.
 

This inconsistency was avoided by making the minimum ECL equal to the HD of the creature. I don't know when they decided to make a 32 HD creature ECL 25 but 4 HD creatures ECL 8. I'll admit that 1 HD was automatically 1 ECL was unfair as not all HD are created equal.
 
Last edited:

Archer said:
This inconsistency was avoided by making the minimum ECL equal to the HD of the creature. I don't know when they decided to make a 32 HD creature ECL 25 but 4 HD creatures ECL 8. I'll admit that 1 HD was automatically 1 ECL was unfair as not all HD are created equal.

Mabye they accidentally put in how much money you have to pay your DM to let you play that monster instead of the actual ECLs? ;)
 

Even worse are the animals listed in the ECL article in Dragon.

Several of the animals (I can remeber the squirrel and the monkey off the top of my head) were listed as ECL +0. This isn't too bad when you look in the MM and see all the minuses they get. Unfortunately, the article specfically mentions that all of the animals are assumed to be Awakened as per the spell.

The spell adds +2 HD, meaning that a monkey barbarian (Mr. Chips!!) that fits into a 1st level party will have 4HD. Combined with any Con increase (such as from raging) this gets really really nutty for a level 1 character.

In case you missed it, the point of all of this is either:

1) Wizards messes up plenty of ECLs, alter them to suit your own campaign.

2) There is plenty of precedent for having an ECL significantly lower than the character's HD.

3) All of the above. ;)

4) The obligatory "Other"
 



And there is not, and has never been, any straight relationship between ECL and HD (or CR, for that matter).

But ECL is a poorly handled mechanic.
 

whatisitgoodfor said:
And your preference might even matter if you ever got off the boards long enough to actually play a game. :D ;)

For your information, I played in 3 games between last Wednesday and Sunday. :p
 


Remove ads

Top