Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Istaran 02-07-07, 08:56 PM	EDIT: Found a more clearly worded ruling on this in the XECS. Completely unconfused now. Just disappointed. Are the LA races really so much better even after losing a HD that they should be nerfed on item purchasing caps as well? And lose one of their expansion slots (essentially paying one slot to unlock an already unlocked race. Wee)? Oh well. Still worth it to make my Gnoll Exemplar, even if I have to make some tweaks.
smerwin29 02-08-07, 09:01 AM	Are the LA races really so much better even after losing a HD that they should be nerfed on item purchasing caps as well? Quite honestly, that's what we are finding out. I know some people say one thing and some people say another, but we're interested in seeing how it works out in actual play. People can guess and have opinions, but hearing about actual play experience will tell. And lose one of their expansion slots (essentially paying one slot to unlock an already unlocked race. Wee)? Oh well. Still worth it to make my Gnoll Exemplar, even if I have to make some tweaks. Again. We'll see. My thought is that the losses do not significantly put players of +1 LA races at a significant disadvantage, or really much of a disadvantage at all. People are still playing the classes, so will should get feedback and see how it goes. What I would hate to see is making it so cool and easy to do that every time you sit down at a table, you have two gnolls, two drow, and two catfolk. We want those classes to be relatively rare, while still allowing players to take them. Putting up some challenges in playing them seems the best way to do that. Shawn
pedr 02-08-07, 09:09 AM	Admittedly this is just an opinion not based on actual play - though I might keep the tiefling duskblade as my Cabal character, so might have some experiences to share later on - but I always thought that the best way would be for the +1 LA to work as per the core rules for core rules issues such as when you get feats (of course) and other such things, but for the campaign-specific stuff like how many action points you get, what your gp limit is and how many expansion slots you have to follow the character tracker level. I'm not entirely sure what my rationale for that is, except that +1 LA creatures are, by the core rules, supposed to have wealth appropriate to their ECL, not their class levels. The current system will give them gp wealth roughly equivalent to the DMG expected wealth table, but the lower gp limit means they can't spend that on ECL-appropriate types of item. Instead they are limited to the types of item that other characters had access to a level before, they simply have more of them. That might make them slightly underpowered for their ECL. So personally I think it ought to be changed, but that's just my uninformed opinion :D
smerwin29 02-08-07, 09:29 AM	So personally I think it ought to be changed, but that's just my uninformed opinion :D How can I argue with someone from OXFORD!? :thinks:
Randall Montgomery 02-08-07, 10:45 AM	In playing with my home group, we've got (IIRC) three characters with a level adjust across all four factions. Due to the previous ambiguity of the rules, we've played it with both the characters ECL and their adjusted level as their level with regards to gold cap, action points, ect., and we've found that the LA characters do struggle when playing with their adjusted level. The loss of an action point, while a small penalty, can sometimes be significant, and the difference in equipment is huge (ie the difference between having a masterwork or a magical weapon). This problem is also only going to get worse as time goes on, since the difference between the gold cap limits gets larger at higher levels. My group is definitely against this rule, and we seriously hope it gets changed.
ambremner 02-08-07, 03:32 PM	We want those classes to be relatively rare, while still allowing players to take them. Putting up some challenges in playing them seems the best way to do that. Shawn Why make these playable races very very rare? This is the only RPGA campaign that allows them to play these races. By cards and faction, you made them rare. Using things to cripple a character races is not a good way to limit the players’ choices. It just makes the players upset and the LA characters the ‘lame duck’ of the party. Xen’drik (even more Eberron) is about playing cool heroic characters. And please correct the fast play level adjusted race characters. They ALL have incorrectly spent gold.
Istaran 02-08-07, 03:52 PM	I note that right now it is potentially crippling, depending on what content shows up in the mods: LA characters are the -only- characters that cannot legally own a +1 weapon. That means no damage versus incorporeal, and no bypassing dr */magic without the help of a magic user tossing you a magic weapon spell. If those don't show up for a few mods, it won't really matter, but concidering every other martial character in the game should have a +1 weapon by now, I'd be suprised if we don't see anything like that. Gnolls are basically made to be martial characters, and Tieflings have a definite affinity for rogueishness, so this can be a huge hinderance. Personally, I wasn't planning to buy a +1 weapon, because I had a class feature that I was supposed to have at this point that would give me up to a +2 enhancement bonus on natural attacks, but that went by the wayside because I am missing a needed expansion slot and had to re-order my class levels accordingly. Oh well. On the other hand if something has DR x/adamantine I'm set. Somehow I had no trouble finding an adamantine tangat, but a basic +1 enhancement is out of my league. Such are the mysteries of Stormreach. I guess my overall ruling is: action points - too small a difference to matter either way, honestly. Plus it probably should be based on HD, as that is what the core AP rule is based on. expansion slots - can make things a little tight for people who really want to play with non-core stuff (raises hand) but it shouldn't cost more than delaying or preventing a feat or spell or maybe class. (I had to reorder two class levels at low levels, and delay a feat from level 12 to 15) gold cap - can be devastating at certain points depending on mod writer assumptions (right now is most likely the worst). In the long run it creates a wierd situation because LA critters will have to buy much more quantity over quality than non LA chars. Balance wise: As wierd as it is, I think this would be appropriate as a limitation that only applies to gnoll and not other LA critters. Why? Gnoll were stripped of their racial HD in XE, which takes off one of their major limiting factors without weakening any of their pluses. Look at your gnoll char or companion, and imagine if two of their class levels were humanoid HD instead. How much worse off would they be? Either way I'm still playing a gnoll, and I know one player who's playing an LA critter in every faction so.. it won't stop people from playing with them. Hey, most of us are drawn to XE in part by all the options we are denied in LG and other organized play.
smerwin29 02-08-07, 05:27 PM	Why make these playable races very very rare? I didn't say very very rare. I said relatively rare. By cards and faction, you made them rare. No. Many of them are completely open. What we want to avoid is making it so attractive to play something "kewl" and overly powerful, that whenever you go to a game you are sitting down with 5 other drow beguilers when you play Cabal games, 5 other gnoll barbarians when you play Blackwheel, etc. Even with things as they are, it is close to that. Using things to cripple a character races is not a good way to limit the players’ choices. Begging the question. Saying +1 LA characters are crippled because of this does not make them crippled because of it. We'll see, through game play, just what the effects are, if there are any effects. It just makes the players upset and the LA characters the ‘lame duck’ of the party. Again, claiming they are lame duck does not make it so. As for making the players upset, sometimes that happens. Anyone who has played in a home game, or DMed a home game, understands that DMs do what they think are right, and sometimes this upsets the players. We Factionmasters have to act as the DM, and we are doing what we think is best for the campaign. I'm sorry if that upsets people. That doesn't mean it is going to change. If we see +1 LA characters suffering for it, THAT is what we will base judgments on. Xen’drik (even more Eberron) is about playing cool heroic characters. I agree. And the implication that playing with a couple less action points, one less expansion slot, and lower-valued magic items (but the same EV) will cause players to be less cool or heroic is a bit insulting to players. And please correct the fast play level adjusted race characters. They ALL have incorrectly spent gold. I'll pass this information on to the person in charge of them. Thanks.
clem 02-13-07, 01:56 AM	How can I argue with someone from OXFORD!? :thinks: Wasn't Benny Hill from Oxford?
smerwin29 02-13-07, 07:33 AM	Exactly! How can I argue with Benny Hill!?