Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Fun_Elemental 06-27-06, 03:19 PM	I'm looking for some rules for monster spell casters that actually make some ammount of sense. Savage Species is just dumb as far as casting monsters are concerned. I'm mostly after finding a good method of making a balanced PC/NPC monster that isn't melee based.
kliate 06-27-06, 04:16 PM	The main disadvantage of Monstrous Spellcasters as PCs is that they (almost invariably) have a level adjustment and/or hit dice that take away from your casting classes. It follows, then, that the ideal caster would either have a minimal level adjustment and hit dice, or that said caster would have hit dice which contribute to one's spellcasting along with a minimal level adjustment. To have a minimal level adjustment, the creature ought to have a minimal arrangement of advantages. Hit dice that contribute to spellcasting, spell-like abilities, good spell resistance and strong bonuses to mental ability scores are attractive to spellcasting, but tend to come with a severe level adjustment. Therein lies the problem - a balanced PC/NPC monstrous spellcaster is either going to be below the curve on spell levels, have a limited collection of spell-like abilities (and a VERY low caster level because of them), or else be largely comparable to a core race spellcaster to begin with (Hit dice essentially equivalent to a casting class). The solution I offer, therefore, is to take a Tiefling. They have good Int and Dex, some energy resistances, and are unaffected by the ____ Person line of spells (due to their outsider type). They will be one level behind on their casting due to the level adjustment, but feel just monstrous enough to enjoy as such a character.
Fun_Elemental 06-27-06, 05:10 PM	Your basically telling me to just accept that the rules suck to the point of being worthless and to simply avoid the need to use them. What I'm saying is, I have a Beholder that I need to beef up because it is no longer any sort of threat. It is pretty obvious that giving it melee levels is just dumb. It is also pretty obvious that giving it caster levels as per the rules is even stupider. What I'm looking for is a balanced way to make a Beholder, or *any* sort of spell caster monster, stay as effective as giving melee levels to a melee mob lets it stay effective. As it is right now, if you tell someone that X is a Dragon-Wizard, they laugh at you and ask if it is going to tickle them to death with shocking grasp. Tell them they are fighting a Dragon-Fighter and they get more worried because it is a dragon with combat feats, Improved BAB, and more HP. What I want, is for there to be a way to make a monster with caster levels that can use those levels to actually do something useful in a round of combat. As it is now, if a Beholder wizard uses a fireball, nobody cares, because it just 'wasted' its turn by using a spell that does a wholly inappropriate ammount of damage. Especially when someone else is going to shoot a Meteor Swarm back at it.
Watchdog_of_Hades 06-27-06, 05:24 PM	I don't have any advice for the beholder, but with guys that the entry specifically states can cast spells (like rakshasas), if it says they cast like clerics or sorcerers or something, adding more levels of that stacks. So if rakshasas cast as 7th-level sorcerers and you add a level, they'll cast as 8th-level sorcerers.
Finarin Panjoro 06-27-06, 05:35 PM	I see where you're coming from on this. Here's a couple of suggestions: 1. If the base monster has caster levels (like a dragon) let the caster class levels stack with what it naturally has already. Also let the dragon trade its natural sorceror caster ability in for Wizard caster levels if it also has class levels in wizard. So an Adult Red Dragon/Sorceror 3 would cast spells as a 10th level sorceror (7 for dragon plus 3 class levels) and could swap all of that to cast as a 10th level wizard. His casting ability would increase both with his dragon age and his class levels. 2. Allow creatures to accumulate spellcaster levels at the same ratio to CR that they would accrue hit dice of their type. So an Aberration (such as a Beholder) would gain 4 spellcasting levels for each 1 point of CR increase. So if you increase his CR by 3 he's now a 12th level caster. Note that this does not also entail a hit dice increase, just caster levels. 3. Analyze the powers of the creature in question (a Beholder) and figure out a ballpark existing caster level for those abilities. Allow any class based casting levels to stack with that. So figure out what level you think the eye rays of the Beholder equivocates too and start building on that with levels of sorceror or wizard. You could create a feat that allows them to stack in any of these ways if you want to be particularly respectful of the rules (MONSTROUS CASTING: prereq: must be a monster, allowed only at DM's discretion). 4. Figure out its CR based on if it was paired with a wiz/sor of the caster level you want. So if you take a CR 13 Beholder and give him 13 sorceror levels he's a CR 15 encounter (the same as two CR 13 enemies). He can take half as many actions as a Beholder and a Sorceror could so he's actually probably weaker than that anyway. But honestly, you're the DM here. You can just add the caster ability you want and assign an appropriate XP award for his increased powers. Add in the spell ability you desire and then compare him to monsters of higher CR, find one you think is roughly equivalent and that's his new CR. This has the advantage of being a serious surprise for your players. When you say he's a wizard beholder it will mean a whole new level of respect on their parts.
Finarin Panjoro 06-27-06, 05:43 PM	Here's a further thought: ADDING SPECIAL ABILITIES You can add any sort of spell-like, supernatural, or extraordinary ability to a creature. As with a class level, you should determine how much, or how little, this ability adds to the creature’s existing repertoire. A suite of abilities that work together should be treated as a single modifier for this purpose. If the ability (or combination of abilities) significantly increases the monster’s combat effectiveness, increase its CR by 2. Minor abilities increase the creature’s CR by 1, and truly trivial abilities may not increase CR at all. If the special abilities a monster gains are not tied to a class or Hit Die increase, this CR increase stacks. A significant special attack is one that stands a good chance of incapacitating or crippling a character in one round. A significant special quality is one that seriously diminishes the monster’s vulnerability to common attacks. Do not add this factor twice if a monster has both special attacks and special qualities. Make sure to “scale” your evaluation of these abilities by the monster’s current CR. This is from the section on improving monsters. The fact is that spellcasting fits the description of a significant special attack and a significant special quality. So I would say that spell casting ability up to the level of the party should only increase the CR by about 2. I'd say that casting up to half the parties level would increase CR by 1. I wouldn't recommend making its caster level better than the parties because a powerful monster casting more powerful spells than the party is likely going to result in a TPK. Just my opinion.
Finarin Panjoro 06-28-06, 12:07 PM	I thought about this some more last night and here are my revised recommendations. 1. Monsters with caster levels (dragons, etc). Add caster class levels as non-associated levels (+1 CR per two levels) with spell ability stacking with their natural ability. Allow sorcerous casters to swap for wizard casting if they have sufficient intelligence. 2. Add spellcasting ability only as a special attack and special quality to monsters with some innate magical ability (beholder, etc). +1 CR for upto half party level, +2 CR for party level ability, +3 CR for better than party level. I like the idea of treating class levels as a separate creature for calculating CR but I think this would have to be play tested. A Beholder with 13 levels of Wizard might prove to be a much greater than CR 15 threat due to the added hp, BAB, improved saves, bonus feats, etc.
Antioch 06-28-06, 12:50 PM	This has been something I have been working on for awhile, tinkering as it were, since I love monsters, and I also love spellcasters (especially wizards and psions). Basically, I came up with three solutions. The simplest one is to make a prestige class that helps resolve this. Essentially, every level you get +1 spellcasting/manifesting/meldshaping/etc. At levels 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10, you get an additional +1 for a total of two extra spellcasting/manifesting/whatevers. I chose to start the bonus at 2nd level so that you couldnt just dip in once, and that way you have to go all the way to 10th to get the full benefit of the class. Other than that the class receives the saves, HD, and skills that you had before. It allows you to overcome five lost levels in an effort to catch up. Theoretically, this class could go beyond 10 levels until you were satisfied. It also has the restriction that your caster level can never exceed your character level. The second method requires DM permission; simply allow the PC to multiclass before completeing the monster class. Its always bothered me how monsters can plow through the entire class in only a couple months, become fully grown in a fraction of the time it would normally take. To me, it represents maturing to a degree (minotaurs going from Medium to Large, for example). My current character is a gynosphinx wizard. I didnt really care about the whole sphinx package so just took it at 1st level, and immediately multiclassed into wizard after that. Eventually I picked up two more sphinx levels, pretty much one every year or so. This method could lead to serious min/maxing (taking the 1st level of pixie and going into rogue, for example, or the 1st level of succubus for the Cha bonus and then going into sorcerer or bard). The other method requires a lot of thinking, as well as player-DM trust and effort. You attempt to figure out what monster benefits are no longer useful, or less useful than they were, and "bleed off" racial features so that when you level up you can get two class levels. This system would help you overcome only LA, not HD (so you dont end up with more HD than character levels). For example I'll go to my sphinx again. At 1st level having claws were kind of nifty, even if they only dealt out 1d4 points of damage. Now, at 12th level...not so much. Same with the limited flight that I was able to get (20 feet with poor maneuverability). The ability to cast a handful of low level divination spells was also somewhat nifty, until now, where I have plenty of spells and no read need for another use of read magic for the day. Those are three things that could possibly be "bled" off, letting me take an extra wizard level when I level up to compensate for the reduced LA. This requires some time, and some things might not be deductable (ability score modifiers, natural armor, fast healing, energy resistances, and spell resistance are some things that might be useful no matter what level you are).
runestar 06-28-06, 01:02 PM	If it is meant as an NPC, you would use cr, and that when coupled with non-associated class lvs rule, usually means that monstrous casters tend to be more powerful than spellcasters of standard races. For PCs, the problem is that monstrous spellcasters tend to come with bonuses that are just too powerful to be had for nothing. That's why you have LA to balance it out. What I'm saying is, I have a Beholder that I need to beef up because it is no longer any sort of threat. It is pretty obvious that giving it melee levels is just dumb. It is also pretty obvious that giving it caster levels as per the rules is even stupider. What I'm looking for is a balanced way to make a Beholder, or *any* sort of spell caster monster, stay as effective as giving melee levels to a melee mob lets it stay effective. One way is to continue giving it abberation HD. Or lvs in the beholder mage prc. Altenatively, if you choose to add on sorc lvs, you can use the non-associated class lv rule, which means that first 11 sorc lvs you add on increases its cr by only 5(11/2, round down). The beholder is clearly not a spellcasting race, its SU rays are powerful enough. As it is right now, if you tell someone that X is a Dragon-Wizard, they laugh at you and ask if it is going to tickle them to death with shocking grasp. Tell them they are fighting a Dragon-Fighter and they get more worried because it is a dragon with combat feats, Improved BAB, and more HP. Dragons can make darn powerful spellcasters. A great wyrm bronze dragon with practiced spellcaster gets caster lv = cr. :)
Spike_Fightwicky 06-28-06, 03:40 PM	Your basically telling me to just accept that the rules suck to the point of being worthless and to simply avoid the need to use them. What I'm saying is, I have a Beholder that I need to beef up because it is no longer any sort of threat. It is pretty obvious that giving it melee levels is just dumb. It is also pretty obvious that giving it caster levels as per the rules is even stupider. What I'm looking for is a balanced way to make a Beholder, or *any* sort of spell caster monster, stay as effective as giving melee levels to a melee mob lets it stay effective. As it is right now, if you tell someone that X is a Dragon-Wizard, they laugh at you and ask if it is going to tickle them to death with shocking grasp. Tell them they are fighting a Dragon-Fighter and they get more worried because it is a dragon with combat feats, Improved BAB, and more HP. What I want, is for there to be a way to make a monster with caster levels that can use those levels to actually do something useful in a round of combat. As it is now, if a Beholder wizard uses a fireball, nobody cares, because it just 'wasted' its turn by using a spell that does a wholly inappropriate ammount of damage. Especially when someone else is going to shoot a Meteor Swarm back at it. I don't really see what the problem. You say that a beholder is no longer a threat to the party. Why is that? Are they too high level, are their anti-beholder tactics too good, are their saves too high? There are some options: - Hit Dice advancement: I can't remember how much advancement you can give a beholder, but it's a VERY good trade off. According to the RAW, for 4 extra hit dice, you increase his CR by only +1. So if you give him 12 extra hit dice, you get the following: 54 extra hit points (before adding in Con bonus), +9 Base attack bonus, 4 feats, 3 stat point increases, increased saves (+4 con and reflex, +8 will) and +6 to the Save DC on all of his eye rays, all for only +3 CR. - Spell-Caster levels: It was stated that spellcaster levels would be non-associated, so that means that each level = 1/2 CR. Charisma is huge for a beholder (if memory serves, Charisma fuels the save DC for his eye beams), so if you give him 10 levels of sorceror, it's only +5 CR and gives you up to 5th level spells. That might not be overly powerful, but not nearly as dismal or 'stupid' as you seem to think. The Beholder mage PRC isn't that bad, either. THe only problem is that you need LoM for it. - Add templates or special abilities: Monster of Legend does a good job breaking monsters, as well as any that give a significant Constitution boost (to compensate for a rise in CR without added hit dice). Usually not the best route for beholder style monsters, but not without merit. Also, you mentioned a dragon wizard... Dragons are all innately spellcasters. Giving them class levels in sorceror in wizard will obviously weaken them... Every 3 hit dice increases their caster level by 2, and gives them the benefits of Dragon racial hit dice... If you tell someone they're going to fight a dragon-wizard, of course they'll laugh, 'cuz the dragon made a poor career choice. If you tell them they'll fight a dragon-sorceror, they'll think 'aren't all dragons sorcerors?' I think the biggest concern would be to find out why your party is so effective, and find a new way to challenge them. Finally, you have to realize that eventually monsters WILL get outdated. Hardly any adventurers will meet worgs after a certain level, and that doesn't mean you should complain that monster advancement rules suck. Besides, you're the DM. Nothing's stopping you from just creating a new type of more powerful Beholder, with different eye-rays and unseen powers.
Antioch 06-29-06, 02:19 AM	My problem with monstrous spellcasters stems purely from a PC point of view; its essentially impossible to play any monster as any kind of spellcaster (the exception being a handful that allow you to stack their spellcaster levels with any you gain through level advancement). Hence why I came up with the three options that I did. Using those methods, it also resolves the issues you have with creating NPCs as well.
Finarin Panjoro 06-29-06, 10:15 AM	It seems clear to me that there is no one answer that will satisfy the needs of both the DM and the players on this issue. A solution that is appropriate for the monster players (such as Antioch's given above) will not suit the needs of DM who needs to keep the monster challenging for 4 PCs. A monster that progresses in the same fashion as a single PC simply can't keep pace with the power curve of 4 PCs. I'd just advance them differently. If its an NPC then arbitrarily set the CR to what you believe is accurate and appropriate.
runestar 06-29-06, 10:28 AM	My problem with monstrous spellcasters stems purely from a PC point of view; its essentially impossible to play any monster as any kind of spellcaster (the exception being a handful that allow you to stack their spellcaster levels with any you gain through level advancement). The problem is that if you can, everyone would end up playing them since they would end up being statistically superior to standard LA+0 races. ;)
kliate 06-29-06, 11:18 AM	Another approach is to take a Monstrous PC in a Gestalt campaign. Provided the DM will allow you to Gestalt against your hit dice AND level adjustment (this issue is rather heavily debated (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=660380)), you should find yourself with a fully competent monstrous spellcaster who doesn't strictly overpower his companions or find his abilities too weak against suitably challenging monsters. After gaining all of your monstrous levels, you'd probably find the Fighter class the best Gestalt option. To summarize my earlier point, the system as written is inherently incapable of producing full-powered monstrous spellcasters (an agreement with the original poster). The length simply detailed the why of it.
Antioch 06-29-06, 12:04 PM	The problem is that if you can, everyone would end up playing them since they would end up being statistically superior to standard LA+0 races. ;) Of the three solutions this can be an issue concerning free multiclassing without completing the monster class first. You could have PCs running around as 1st level nymphs and succubi, and levels in bard or sorcerer (or any other Cha-based class for that matter). That method really relies on player-DM trust, and I certainly wouldnt say that its for every group out there (especially groups with powergamers). I understand why they wrote it the way they did, but I think its possible that some groups could make exceptions. I could possibly see this being an issue with bleeding off racial features. Granted, this would mean that some PCs would have more options available, but that wouldnt necessary make them overpowered (especially, as in my case, where you dont use half of them at your current level). Lastly, the prestige class solution seem to be a universal fix that could be implemented by any group.