Wizards and ECL sux

[Winternight]

I did post this in another thread. That`s just MNSHO
Am I right or is there any rational reason to take a ECL?
(Maybe apart from ECL 1 or 2).
Have any one of you played an ECL 8/wiz1 charakter? Would you ever?

 

[Darklone]

No, but IIRC a Rakshasa is ECL 7 and his first 7 HD count as sorcerer levels.

Wouldn't that be nice?

 

[Li Shenron]

No, but IIRC a Rakshasa is ECL 7 and his first 7 HD count as sorcerer levels.

Wouldn't that be nice?

Mmm... a Rakshasa has 7HD and +7 level adjustment, doesn't it make him an ECL 14?

I am still stuck at basic monsters... (see my other thread)

 

[Li Shenron]

In general, I would say to stay away from creatures with high level adjustment*, which doesn't grant you extra HD, and usually comes from magic abilities you may have from the Wizard class anyway. Creatures with high ECL coming mostly from racial HD would let you make a character with better physical defenses, but if it's around 8 HD, you'll have little space for Wizard levels, and it will make you a combat-oriented creature with minor spellcasting.

What about a Satyr? ECL = HD + LA = 5 + 2 = 7

You'll get 5HD worth of stuff from the Fey type (HD is only d6, but good Refl+Will, 6 skill point/HD = 48).

For the +2 adjustment you'll get +2 in every ability score (except Strength), speed 40ft, Alertness, +4 natural armor, minor damage reduction and Pipes (if your DM agrees). It means better Intelligence and several interesting defenses.

*edit: when you are making a spellcaster, at least

 

[Kae'Yoss]

I did post this in another thread. That`s just MNSHO
Am I right or is there any rational reason to take a ECL?
(Maybe apart from ECL 1 or 2).
Have any one of you played an ECL 8/wiz1 charakter? Would you ever?

You see it wrong. The problem is not the ECL, but the abilities you get that give you that high level adjustment.

Take the Ogre for example: 4 Giant HD + Level Adjustment +2, and you have a starting ECL of 6 - and you have no character level yet. So an Ogre Wiz 1 has an ECL of 7 - but is almost useless as wizard, especially compared to those Wiz 7 or fey'ri sor 5! But that's because Ogre's aren't wizards. They're warriors. They take something big and heavy and beat the crap out of people with that. An Ogre Ftr1 or Ogre Brb1 could well hold stride with a Half-Orc Brb7 or a Dwarven Ftr7 or something like that.

No, if you want a race with a starting high ECL that's good for spellcasters, take some spellcasting race.

A nymph casts as a Druid 7. They have 6HD + LA+7, so your Nymph Druid 1 would be ECL 14, and would cast as a Druid 8.
A rakshasa casts as Sorcerer 7. 7HD + LA+7 = ECL 14, so a Rakshasa Sor 1 is ECL 15 and casts as sorcerer 8.
Cuatl: Cast as Sor9, 9hd+7 -> Cuatl Sor1 = ECL 17, cast as Sor 10

While they still lose a lot of caster levels, they make up for it with their racial bonuses.


So if you want to play a spellcaster with the most possible spell levels, stick to human
If you want to play a spellcaster with a lot of special abilities, take a spellcasting race
If you want to play a spellcaster/warrior character, either multiclass with fighter or something or take a fighting race.

 

[Li Shenron]

Is there anything that prevents a creature to take a Prestige Class without having levels in a base class, if it meets all the prerequisites with its racial features?

 

[Pax]

Li ... nothing at all. In fact, some of hte higher base-HD creatures coudl count that as something of an innate advantage -- being able to pass right by the base classes and into a prestige class.

They just have to meet the prerequisites, is all.

 

[jabberwocky]

Well, Sylph (from MM2) is a very good choice for a sorceror. 3-9HD outsider LA +5 (so ECL 8), cast as a sorceror 4 levels higher than their HD. One level behind on spellcasting, in exchange you get flight (good) 90!, hefty dex, int, wis, and cha bonuses, SR, greater invisibility at will, and the ability to summon a large elemental once a day. Plus, a basic sylph qualifies for eldritch knight for 1st level (or substitute x other prestige class). This is easily the best ECL race for a sorceror that I've seen.

 

[Deset Gled]

Slightly tangental, but psions can benefit from any class that has an high racial bonus to any ability. I think they could live with an ECL of 3-5 without much loss at mid-high levels. Sprites would be ideal.

 

[jgsugden]

The ECL system is inherently broken.

D&D is designed around certain concepts and constraints on character abilities. Playing monsters breaks those concepts. There are certain abilities that are just too strong in the hands of a PC. A demon that can teleport at will is fine as a monster because he only teleports at will during one combat (in which he is killed). Giving that ability to a PC makes him very powerful. The ECL systemn tries to balance these overly powerful abilities by giving the PC monster a weakness: fewer hit dice (via the level adjustment). This doesn't balance the character. It just makes them unbalanced in two ways: an overpoweringly strong ability and a devastating weakness.

Why did WotC make the ECL system? High demand. People wanted to play monsters. Wizards camer up with the best system they could for allowing people ro play monsters as characters. Unfortunately, no system will allow for balanced play with monster abilities.

If you want balanced play, don't allow ECLs. A few of the low ECL classes can work, but any race that gives an ability score bonus above +2 or gives the character an ability not normally available to PCs at low levels will likely unbalance the game.