Balancing the thrallherd [Archive] - Wizards Community

Balancing the thrallherd [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Lord_of_Omnipotence
10-03-06, 08:51 PM Hey, I'm playing an Elan Telepath/Thrallherd in my current campaign, and my DM has become concerned with the balance issues of having two characters (soon to be three characters).

A few issues he wants addressed include what happens when a thrall dies and how should i be able to manipulate my thrall's equipment.

Because i get a new thrall whennver my current thrall dies, having my thralls die can be advantageous to me in terms of money, something my DM is rather concerned about. In addition to this, he is rather worried that my character's power will be far greater than anyone else's, as having three characters can be quite powerful.

We have reached a sort of compromise. I am under no circumstances allowed to mess with my thrall's money. He comes with money appropriate for his level (NPC), and he can buy equipment with it. When he levels up, i can change his equipment so it is appropriate for his new level. In addition to this, he is prohibited from spending any experience to make items or use spells, so there's no incentive for me to use him and sacrifice him. When he dies, i am not allowed to collect and of the money or equipment he has dropped, as i will get a new thrall with his own set of gear.

Do these conditions seem appropriate to you? If not, what do you propose I do?
DarkNick
10-03-06, 08:59 PM Well, one thing I would do is assume that you as a player needs to supply everything for your thrall (as if they dropped everything to be your thrall). The thrall might come with minimal equipment but after that all its money comes from you. That way when it dies you get it back and you can feel free to minipulate at will. It does not make sense not being able to loot the body, unless you are good and feel that equipment belongs to the thrall.
Would you loot a fellow players body? If the answer is yes then loot your thrall. If not then don't loot your thrall. If your a good character then looting your thrall may not be an issue. Just becasue you can does not mean you will.

Personaly I feel that a thrall should only rarely travel with the player. A thrall could be someone in a position of power, a bar owner, non-adventurer. The benefits are in having an ally you can call upon in when in trouble or give you a political advantage. They might be someone that guards your 'home'. It might be worth exploring this sort of thing to keep the balance. At best I would have one thrall to accompany you as your personal servant/slave/henchman/cohort, the rest could be non-combatants.
PhaedrusXY
10-03-06, 09:14 PM I agree with DarkNick about having you supply the thralls with gear. That is alot more believable than you just leaving it laying on their dead bodies. That is just ridiculous.

I don't agree that you should have non-combatant Thralls that you leave at home. Part of the entire purpose of playing a Thrallherd is having Thralls to help you fight. It isn't that different from taking the Leadership feat, except that you pay for it in a different way. Two manifester levels is a LOT more costly of a price than a single feat. So it is fine that the Thrallherd gets greater benefits than a normal character with Leadership.

I could see most of your Believers being noncombatants with NPC classes that you don't bring into combat, though.
DarkNick
10-03-06, 09:38 PM I agree with DarkNick about having you supply the thralls with gear. That is alot more believable than you just leaving it laying on their dead bodies. That is just ridiculous.

I don't agree that you should have non-combatant Thralls that you leave at home. Part of the entire purpose of playing a Thrallherd is having Thralls to help you fight. It isn't that different from taking the Leadership feat, except that you pay for it in a different way. Two manifester levels is a LOT more costly of a price than a single feat. So it is fine that the Thrallherd gets greater benefits than a normal character with Leadership.

I could see most of your Believers being noncombatants with NPC classes that you don't bring into combat, though.

Either way. I don't think it is the only purpose of a thrallherd is to help you fight. In a low combat game it might be more advantageous to have thralls in different positions. (not that I know anything about thrallherders, never seen the class, I assumed they were a bit like cohorts) Since it was mentioned that the DM was worried about balance my non-combatant suggestion was a way of having your cake and eating it too.
PhaedrusXY
10-03-06, 09:43 PM (not that I know anything about thrallherders, never seen the class, I assumed they were a bit like cohorts) The SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/prestigeClasses/thrallherd.htm) is a wonderful thing. ;) It is basically like a "mage" prestige class that loses two caster levels. That is a pretty large price to pay, but the benefits are certainly worth it in this case (unless the DM nerfs them into meaninglessness).
Lord_of_Omnipotence
10-03-06, 10:13 PM Well, the description of the leadership feat says cohorts come into the party with equpiment appropriate for an NPC of their level. I suppose your method does account for the problem of making a profit when the thrall dies, but the problem with it is i have to spend my own money on the thrall, thus degrading the quality of my own equpiment.

And i don't care about the sense part right now, i care about the balance. If it is balanced, i can make up a reason for it later.
PhaedrusXY
10-03-06, 10:18 PM Have the first thrall(s) show up with gear. If they die, have the later ones show up with little to nothing. When your main character goes up in levels, then later ones will have a bit more gear (just enough to bring their wealth up to the appropriate amount, including the gear from the old thralls).

This may sound complicated... but it isn't really. Basically, the DM just treats their wealth as yours. He decreases/increases it in whatever way he would normally decrease/increase PC wealth.
DarkNick
10-03-06, 10:24 PM In that case there is really only one solution. Don't take their stuff.

Do they get a share of the party treasure and experience? If not, then where is the money and experience comming from when they go up levels? If yes, how do the other players feel about this?

In all fairness I would consider them part of your character. You should be responsible for funding them, they are your thralls afterall. This is balanced, and it makes more sense. Thats the tradeoff, you have lesser gear so your thrall can have better gear. It's a fair trade. Two characters or more with good gear are going to be more powerful than one with better gear.

If your level is high enough above the thrall then their starting wealth is not going to exactly going to add much to your exsisting wealth anyway.
PhaedrusXY
10-04-06, 01:19 AM Thralls are 1 level lower than the Thrallherd. The Thrallherd starts out with 1 Thrall (usually character level 6), and gains another at the last level of the class (usually character level 15). They function like cohorts, except they are automatically replaced in 24 hours if they are killed.

You should probably ask about this on the Psionics forum, where people are more knowledgeable about the class.
Thubby
10-05-06, 10:21 PM the thrall ability gives you swarms of units, numbering in the hundreds if power permits. this can be game breaking. 138 adepts all casting magic missle still makes 1 dead critter.
i personaly dont let people use the class, as it just gets boring throughing waves at everything, and my players dont like not doing stuff for themselves.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Lord_of_Omnipotence 10-03-06, 08:51 PM	Hey, I'm playing an Elan Telepath/Thrallherd in my current campaign, and my DM has become concerned with the balance issues of having two characters (soon to be three characters). A few issues he wants addressed include what happens when a thrall dies and how should i be able to manipulate my thrall's equipment. Because i get a new thrall whennver my current thrall dies, having my thralls die can be advantageous to me in terms of money, something my DM is rather concerned about. In addition to this, he is rather worried that my character's power will be far greater than anyone else's, as having three characters can be quite powerful. We have reached a sort of compromise. I am under no circumstances allowed to mess with my thrall's money. He comes with money appropriate for his level (NPC), and he can buy equipment with it. When he levels up, i can change his equipment so it is appropriate for his new level. In addition to this, he is prohibited from spending any experience to make items or use spells, so there's no incentive for me to use him and sacrifice him. When he dies, i am not allowed to collect and of the money or equipment he has dropped, as i will get a new thrall with his own set of gear. Do these conditions seem appropriate to you? If not, what do you propose I do?
DarkNick 10-03-06, 08:59 PM	Well, one thing I would do is assume that you as a player needs to supply everything for your thrall (as if they dropped everything to be your thrall). The thrall might come with minimal equipment but after that all its money comes from you. That way when it dies you get it back and you can feel free to minipulate at will. It does not make sense not being able to loot the body, unless you are good and feel that equipment belongs to the thrall. Would you loot a fellow players body? If the answer is yes then loot your thrall. If not then don't loot your thrall. If your a good character then looting your thrall may not be an issue. Just becasue you can does not mean you will. Personaly I feel that a thrall should only rarely travel with the player. A thrall could be someone in a position of power, a bar owner, non-adventurer. The benefits are in having an ally you can call upon in when in trouble or give you a political advantage. They might be someone that guards your 'home'. It might be worth exploring this sort of thing to keep the balance. At best I would have one thrall to accompany you as your personal servant/slave/henchman/cohort, the rest could be non-combatants.
PhaedrusXY 10-03-06, 09:14 PM	I agree with DarkNick about having you supply the thralls with gear. That is alot more believable than you just leaving it laying on their dead bodies. That is just ridiculous. I don't agree that you should have non-combatant Thralls that you leave at home. Part of the entire purpose of playing a Thrallherd is having Thralls to help you fight. It isn't that different from taking the Leadership feat, except that you pay for it in a different way. Two manifester levels is a LOT more costly of a price than a single feat. So it is fine that the Thrallherd gets greater benefits than a normal character with Leadership. I could see most of your Believers being noncombatants with NPC classes that you don't bring into combat, though.
DarkNick 10-03-06, 09:38 PM	I agree with DarkNick about having you supply the thralls with gear. That is alot more believable than you just leaving it laying on their dead bodies. That is just ridiculous. I don't agree that you should have non-combatant Thralls that you leave at home. Part of the entire purpose of playing a Thrallherd is having Thralls to help you fight. It isn't that different from taking the Leadership feat, except that you pay for it in a different way. Two manifester levels is a LOT more costly of a price than a single feat. So it is fine that the Thrallherd gets greater benefits than a normal character with Leadership. I could see most of your Believers being noncombatants with NPC classes that you don't bring into combat, though. Either way. I don't think it is the only purpose of a thrallherd is to help you fight. In a low combat game it might be more advantageous to have thralls in different positions. (not that I know anything about thrallherders, never seen the class, I assumed they were a bit like cohorts) Since it was mentioned that the DM was worried about balance my non-combatant suggestion was a way of having your cake and eating it too.
PhaedrusXY 10-03-06, 09:43 PM	(not that I know anything about thrallherders, never seen the class, I assumed they were a bit like cohorts) The SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/prestigeClasses/thrallherd.htm) is a wonderful thing. ;) It is basically like a "mage" prestige class that loses two caster levels. That is a pretty large price to pay, but the benefits are certainly worth it in this case (unless the DM nerfs them into meaninglessness).
Lord_of_Omnipotence 10-03-06, 10:13 PM	Well, the description of the leadership feat says cohorts come into the party with equpiment appropriate for an NPC of their level. I suppose your method does account for the problem of making a profit when the thrall dies, but the problem with it is i have to spend my own money on the thrall, thus degrading the quality of my own equpiment. And i don't care about the sense part right now, i care about the balance. If it is balanced, i can make up a reason for it later.
PhaedrusXY 10-03-06, 10:18 PM	Have the first thrall(s) show up with gear. If they die, have the later ones show up with little to nothing. When your main character goes up in levels, then later ones will have a bit more gear (just enough to bring their wealth up to the appropriate amount, including the gear from the old thralls). This may sound complicated... but it isn't really. Basically, the DM just treats their wealth as yours. He decreases/increases it in whatever way he would normally decrease/increase PC wealth.
DarkNick 10-03-06, 10:24 PM	In that case there is really only one solution. Don't take their stuff. Do they get a share of the party treasure and experience? If not, then where is the money and experience comming from when they go up levels? If yes, how do the other players feel about this? In all fairness I would consider them part of your character. You should be responsible for funding them, they are your thralls afterall. This is balanced, and it makes more sense. Thats the tradeoff, you have lesser gear so your thrall can have better gear. It's a fair trade. Two characters or more with good gear are going to be more powerful than one with better gear. If your level is high enough above the thrall then their starting wealth is not going to exactly going to add much to your exsisting wealth anyway.
PhaedrusXY 10-04-06, 01:19 AM	Thralls are 1 level lower than the Thrallherd. The Thrallherd starts out with 1 Thrall (usually character level 6), and gains another at the last level of the class (usually character level 15). They function like cohorts, except they are automatically replaced in 24 hours if they are killed. You should probably ask about this on the Psionics forum, where people are more knowledgeable about the class.
Thubby 10-05-06, 10:21 PM	the thrall ability gives you swarms of units, numbering in the hundreds if power permits. this can be game breaking. 138 adepts all casting magic missle still makes 1 dead critter. i personaly dont let people use the class, as it just gets boring throughing waves at everything, and my players dont like not doing stuff for themselves.