Level adjustment, good or bad thing? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Level adjustment, good or bad thing? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
RaivokasMagma
08-15-07, 09:49 AM Title tells everything.
Naderion
08-15-07, 10:11 AM It's like democracy. It's not really satisfying, but until now, it seems no one has found a better option.
pres_man
08-15-07, 10:20 AM Well if the choice is between using LA or not allowing a variety of racial choices, yeah, I think LA is a good thing.
The_Ditto
08-15-07, 10:31 AM I think it depends ...

If you're allowing the Unearthed arcana buy off rules, it's a good thing ... (really good thing) .. which might indicate that the buy off are either too good, or possibly(?) break LA ...

Without it ... it's not too appealing to most cases ... caster or melee ... losing out on the HD, BaB, etc ... just sucks ... big time ...
DeathByRodent
08-15-07, 10:38 AM I'll second the above replies - it beats not being able to play certain races.

LA just doesn't scale well across levels - I guess its not too bad for +1, but more than that, things get weird. It seems really funcky that a +2 LA race wizard can have something like 5 hit points and run the risk of being killed by a rat while having almost the equivalent of a level 3 character's xp.

I wonder if an xp penalty would have a better overall effect. It would probably have the opposite problem, not enough of an effect at low levels, making any LA race very attractive for low level and slower leveling campaigns.

I suppose another way would be to have a different level/xp progression, but one of the big things with the more recent editions was to get away from multiple tables.
Orchomenos
08-15-07, 10:56 AM Another solution would be Savage Progression (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sp/20040213a).

It's true that LA gives a bad hit to spellcasters. Practiced Spellcaster helps, but only works with HD, no LA, and doesn't give higher level spell known.

But LA is not necessary bad for a warrior type. Often, the BAB loss is caught back by an higher STR (Half-Giant, Goliath, Half-Ogre) or higher DEX (half-fey, hobgoblin). Though the HD loss is bad, the CON bonus can help to buyoff the loss HP, but not that much.
ragoftag
08-15-07, 11:08 AM I am trying to crunch everything down into either the Raptor flight system or racial levels, both of which have appeal. After a wimpy band of Ogres trashed our level 1 half-dragon on round 1, I became a skeptic on level adjustments. As mentioned above, Savage Progression solves a lot of the problems. And remember, Monte Cook, et. all, put their pants on on leg at a time, they even admitted this (see 3.5).
Kursk
08-15-07, 11:12 AM Level adjustment, good or bad thing?

Don't care one way or another as I don't use monsters as PC races.
Istaran
08-15-07, 04:55 PM It'd be kind of nice if they would try to balance creatures with a HD = ECL = CR basis. Just a thought. If you look at dragons for example they apparantly have about the same 2:1 ratio of ECL : CR that NPC classes get, with their HD running around half way in between. In practice though they are conspicuously hard for their CR (partly due to the high saves and HP, though high BAB+str and multiple attacks makes them deadly in melee, and their breath weapons + flight give them other nice options even before spells come online) and conspicuously weak for PCs (laughable caster progression, breath weapons way too weak for their ECL to be useful, tiny size on the lowest ECL ones, nothing but stat boosts to compete with the bevy of class features other races get for martial combat, lagging in BAB feats HD and skill caps. By the time their really nice racial features start coming on-line they are almost in epic levels and the other PCs are far superior.)

Overall, I'd say if you're willing to take the time/effort, building a savage progression with HD (even weak ones) at every level for any alternate race you want in your campaign is probably a good improvement, but otherwise LA is a poor but workable solution.
arderkrag
08-15-07, 05:13 PM I don't use LA.

I don't make other people use LA.

I just make the choice whether or not to allow oddball races well in advance and make them drop the monstrous HD.

They get the modifer of the race's listed score as a bonus to ability scores (thus a 23 str gives you a +7 on your roll) and they keep all SLAs and so on, including natural armor, granted feats, etc.

ADDED:
You know, I thought up a great alternative to level adjustment a while back. Instead of a flat adjustment value, make it an experience adjustment using the following system:

exp you need for next level + (level you are currently x level adjustment x 100)

Ergo, a +2 adjustment at level 1 would boost your level 2 exp to 1200. For third, 3400, for fourth, 6600, and so on. I personally find this to be a much fairer system (Wizards, are you listening? This is good stuff.).
Yaeri
08-15-07, 05:23 PM Well if the choice is between using LA or not allowing a variety of racial choices, yeah, I think LA is a good thing.
What he said. The same goes for other things I sometimes see people complain about, like challenge ratings and such.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
RaivokasMagma 08-15-07, 09:49 AM	Title tells everything.
Naderion 08-15-07, 10:11 AM	It's like democracy. It's not really satisfying, but until now, it seems no one has found a better option.
pres_man 08-15-07, 10:20 AM	Well if the choice is between using LA or not allowing a variety of racial choices, yeah, I think LA is a good thing.
The_Ditto 08-15-07, 10:31 AM	I think it depends ... If you're allowing the Unearthed arcana buy off rules, it's a good thing ... (really good thing) .. which might indicate that the buy off are either too good, or possibly(?) break LA ... Without it ... it's not too appealing to most cases ... caster or melee ... losing out on the HD, BaB, etc ... just sucks ... big time ...
DeathByRodent 08-15-07, 10:38 AM	I'll second the above replies - it beats not being able to play certain races. LA just doesn't scale well across levels - I guess its not too bad for +1, but more than that, things get weird. It seems really funcky that a +2 LA race wizard can have something like 5 hit points and run the risk of being killed by a rat while having almost the equivalent of a level 3 character's xp. I wonder if an xp penalty would have a better overall effect. It would probably have the opposite problem, not enough of an effect at low levels, making any LA race very attractive for low level and slower leveling campaigns. I suppose another way would be to have a different level/xp progression, but one of the big things with the more recent editions was to get away from multiple tables.
Orchomenos 08-15-07, 10:56 AM	Another solution would be Savage Progression (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sp/20040213a). It's true that LA gives a bad hit to spellcasters. Practiced Spellcaster helps, but only works with HD, no LA, and doesn't give higher level spell known. But LA is not necessary bad for a warrior type. Often, the BAB loss is caught back by an higher STR (Half-Giant, Goliath, Half-Ogre) or higher DEX (half-fey, hobgoblin). Though the HD loss is bad, the CON bonus can help to buyoff the loss HP, but not that much.
ragoftag 08-15-07, 11:08 AM	I am trying to crunch everything down into either the Raptor flight system or racial levels, both of which have appeal. After a wimpy band of Ogres trashed our level 1 half-dragon on round 1, I became a skeptic on level adjustments. As mentioned above, Savage Progression solves a lot of the problems. And remember, Monte Cook, et. all, put their pants on on leg at a time, they even admitted this (see 3.5).
Kursk 08-15-07, 11:12 AM	Level adjustment, good or bad thing? Don't care one way or another as I don't use monsters as PC races.
Istaran 08-15-07, 04:55 PM	It'd be kind of nice if they would try to balance creatures with a HD = ECL = CR basis. Just a thought. If you look at dragons for example they apparantly have about the same 2:1 ratio of ECL : CR that NPC classes get, with their HD running around half way in between. In practice though they are conspicuously hard for their CR (partly due to the high saves and HP, though high BAB+str and multiple attacks makes them deadly in melee, and their breath weapons + flight give them other nice options even before spells come online) and conspicuously weak for PCs (laughable caster progression, breath weapons way too weak for their ECL to be useful, tiny size on the lowest ECL ones, nothing but stat boosts to compete with the bevy of class features other races get for martial combat, lagging in BAB feats HD and skill caps. By the time their really nice racial features start coming on-line they are almost in epic levels and the other PCs are far superior.) Overall, I'd say if you're willing to take the time/effort, building a savage progression with HD (even weak ones) at every level for any alternate race you want in your campaign is probably a good improvement, but otherwise LA is a poor but workable solution.
arderkrag 08-15-07, 05:13 PM	I don't use LA. I don't make other people use LA. I just make the choice whether or not to allow oddball races well in advance and make them drop the monstrous HD. They get the modifer of the race's listed score as a bonus to ability scores (thus a 23 str gives you a +7 on your roll) and they keep all SLAs and so on, including natural armor, granted feats, etc. ADDED: You know, I thought up a great alternative to level adjustment a while back. Instead of a flat adjustment value, make it an experience adjustment using the following system: exp you need for next level + (level you are currently x level adjustment x 100) Ergo, a +2 adjustment at level 1 would boost your level 2 exp to 1200. For third, 3400, for fourth, 6600, and so on. I personally find this to be a much fairer system (Wizards, are you listening? This is good stuff.).
Yaeri 08-15-07, 05:23 PM	Well if the choice is between using LA or not allowing a variety of racial choices, yeah, I think LA is a good thing. What he said. The same goes for other things I sometimes see people complain about, like challenge ratings and such.