The LA-assignment thread II: Where The Em Dash Doesn't Exist

[Remuko]

According to the SRD the Mohrg only has one slam and I was looking up something similar recently and it stated that a medium sized creature (idr what it was specifically) uses both arms to make a single slam attack and it wasn't until becoming large size that they got a slam with each arm. I'm 90% certain this mohrg only has a single slam attack which is using both arms at once and as such it uses 1.5x str bonus.

[Thurbane]

Good Str & Dex boosts on a 14HD poor BAB frame. Nope.

At will paralyzing touch attack? Not bad, but underwhelming at 14th level.

Near unlimited Zombie minions? Pretty darn good, but again, not all that impressive at 14th level. A 14th level necro-focused minionmancer will have much more impressive undead, and while they might have a hard cap on numbers/HD, practically it's not going to matter that much.

I definitely agree with LA -0.

Interesting side note for DMs: if you really want the Zombie template on an otherwise ineligible creature: "A Mohrg did it!".

According to the SRD the Mohrg only has one slam and I was looking up something similar recently and it stated that a medium sized creature (idr what it was specifically) uses both arms to make a single slam attack and it wasn't until becoming large size that they got a slam with each arm. I'm 90% certain this mohrg only has a single slam attack which is using both arms at once and as such it uses 1.5x str bonus.

I can definitely see your logic behind assuming it uses both arms for its slam, but do you have a rules citation behind that?

[Remuko]

Good Str & Dex boosts on a 14HD poor BAB frame. Nope.

At will paralyzing touch attack? Not bad, but underwhelming at 14th level.

Near unlimited Zombie minions? Pretty darn good, but again, not all that impressive at 14th level. A 14th level necro-focused minionmancer will have much more impressive undead, and while they might have a hard cap on numbers/HD, practically it's not going to matter that much.

I definitely agree with LA -0.

Interesting side note for DMs: if you really want the Zombie template on an otherwise ineligible creature: "A Mohrg did it!".



I can definitely see your logic behind assuming it uses both arms for its slam, but do you have a rules citation behind that?

No I don't but it seemed logical and I remember seeing multiple medium sized creatures always only having one slam attack but a large gaining two despite having the same number of limbs. I don't think its RAW but its likely RAI.

[danielxcutter]

No I don't but it seemed logical and I remember seeing multiple medium sized creatures always only having one slam attack but a large gaining two despite having the same number of limbs. I don't think its RAW but its likely RAI.

Nothing comes into mind for RAW, but it makes a lot of sense, now that I think about it.

[ExLibrisMortis]

The Rules Compendium specifies this, a slight update from the Monster Manual.

The number of attacks a creature can make with its natural weapons depends on the type of the attack — a creature can make one bite attack, one attack per claw or tentacle, one gore attack, one sting attack, or one slam attack. Large or larger creatures that have arms or armlike limbs can make a slam attack with each arm. Refer to the individual monster descriptions, which take precedence over these general rules.

Page 299 of the Monster Manual specifies that a creature with a single primary natural attack adds 1.5x strength bonus on that attack.

So, by the general rule, a mohrg has one slam, not necessarily with 1.5x strength bonus, because there is a second primary natural attack (the tongue does not get -5 on a full attack). The mohrg statblock does seem to assume 1.5x strength on the slam, though, which seems reasonable, because it's the only damaging attack available to the mohrg.

[Zancloufer]

To be fair it's heavily implied that the slam is with both hands. Two handed weapon = 1.5 times strength mod on attacks. I picture it as if your almost making a two handed fist and then bringing it down on someone.

Also while I understand that negative LA is generally bad, we have 14 undead HD. 14 Undead HD. +9 NA, +10 Str and +8 Dex are nice but it has very little in the way of class features. If it was allowed to have -LA how much do you think would be reasonable? Maybe -4? Would at least let you get in 10 full levels of whatever class you want and Undead HD are so bad that even at level 10 this thing wouldn't be that powerful of a PC.

[Mike Miller]

It has been brought up multiple times that negative LA isn't a thing for the purposes of this thread. The -0 rating implies the creature is worse than 0 but that determination is up to the individual DM to go beyond 0 and actually impose a negative LA.

[Malimar]

This "make a fist with both hands and slam with it" business just makes me picture Captain Kirk.

[dhasenan]

If it was allowed to have -LA how much do you think would be reasonable?

If you want to make a thread with, say, shortened savage progressions, or revised (lower HD?) versions of LA -0 creatures, that would be awesome.

[javcs]

To be fair it's heavily implied that the slam is with both hands. Two handed weapon = 1.5 times strength mod on attacks. I picture it as if your almost making a two handed fist and then bringing it down on someone.

Also while I understand that negative LA is generally bad, we have 14 undead HD. 14 Undead HD. +9 NA, +10 Str and +8 Dex are nice but it has very little in the way of class features. If it was allowed to have -LA how much do you think would be reasonable? Maybe -4? Would at least let you get in 10 full levels of whatever class you want and Undead HD are so bad that even at level 10 this thing wouldn't be that powerful of a PC.

It has been brought up multiple times that negative LA isn't a thing for the purposes of this thread. The -0 rating implies the creature is worse than 0 but that determination is up to the individual DM to go beyond 0 and actually impose a negative LA.

If you want to make a thread with, say, shortened savage progressions, or revised (lower HD?) versions of LA -0 creatures, that would be awesome.

In order to assign a "negative LA" and keep it balanced, you also need to determine what effect negative LA actually has for the purpose of your calculations.
Letting you run with more HD than your ECL is bad for balance, because that means epic feats early - and can screw up skill point prereqs.
Subtracting actual RHD makes the feats awkward - now you need to either decide which to drop or which are so essential to the creature that they should now be bonus feats.
Alternatively - and this is what I'd favor - would be that ECL=RHD, and the negative LA gives you however many levels of RHD gestalted with class levels. However, then you need to decide what, if any, restrictions go on those gestalted class levels.

However, this should probably be done in its own thread, as Inevitability isn't doing it here.

[Daedroth]

However, this should probably be done in its own thread, as Inevitability isn't doing it here.

I did one, but is dead because the lack of feedback.

[Thurbane]

This "make a fist with both hands and slam with it" business just makes me picture Captain Kirk.

There's a feat for that if you want it on a character: Hammer Fist (Dragon Compendium)

[Remuko]

There's a feat for that if you want it on a character: Hammer Fist (Dragon Compendium)

A bit off topic but it seems pretty dumb that that is even a feat. Anyone with improved unarmed strike should just be able to do that tbh.

[Celestia]

A bit off topic but it seems pretty dumb that that is even a feat. Anyone with improved unarmed strike should just be able to do that tbh.

If you took out all the feats that should just be standard options, then you'd have to get rid of half the fighter bonus feats.

[Remuko]

If you took out all the feats that should just be standard options, then you'd have to get rid of half the fighter bonus feats.

Good then we can remove the fighters bonus feats and give it some real class features so its not trash. Sounds like a win/win to me!

[GreatWyrmGold]

Spoiler

Show

But... as long as you allow Illithid Savant as a player class, there are an arbitrary number of illithid savants.
Your players just have to keep making new illithid savant PCs as the old ones are getting eaten...

...So let me get this straight. Alice and Bob make illithid savants. Alice eats Bob's character's brain. Bob rolls up a new illithid savant, and Alice eats his brain. Repeat ad nauseum until godhood is achieved.
Yeah, no. That "exploit" makes Pun-Pun look sane. It would be simpler to roll up an army of expendable wizards with explosive runes and WBL spent entirely on gems.

Something as simple as a Potion of Enlarge Person will cancel out the size advantage of the Minotaur, and rage closes the gap in STR bonuses.

I feel obliged to point out that minotaurs can also rage and drink potions.

I don't think it'll be too game-breaking at ECL 14, though. Enemies at that level being what they are, slow-moving unintelligent corpses will barely hamper them. In addition, any kind of travel but slow overland will result in the mohrg having to abandon some of his pets: teleportation and its buddies have creature limits after all. With their reanimation useless, at most a mohrg can play at being a poor BAB-fighter with the occasional successful paralysis attempt.

Use-impaired. Sure, you'll have to leave all but a few back at base, and they're not going to be much good in a typical fight, but any campaign where someone might consider playing a reanimated murderer will probably be able to find some use for a large horde of undead servants. It's like the Leadership feat, except without morale or supply problems and you can build a force of as many people as you can kill.
I'm not disputing the -0, but I am disputing the idea that it would be useless.

No I don't but it seemed logical and I remember seeing multiple medium sized creatures always only having one slam attack but a large gaining two despite having the same number of limbs. I don't think its RAW but its likely RAI.

I'm not sure it counts as RA-Anything, since the number of limbs used is at most a special effect.

[Inevitability]

I feel obliged to point out that minotaurs can also rage and drink potions.

No potions of Enlarge Person, though.

Use-impaired. Sure, you'll have to leave all but a few back at base, and they're not going to be much good in a typical fight, but any campaign where someone might consider playing a reanimated murderer will probably be able to find some use for a large horde of undead servants. It's like the Leadership feat, except without morale or supply problems and you can build a force of as many people as you can kill.
I'm not disputing the -0, but I am disputing the idea that it would be useless.

Fair enough.

[lord_khaine]

No potions of Enlarge Person, though.

Can use a Psionic Tattoo of expansion instead.

And unless we are talking about really high opt builds, then i really cant see what sort of melee characters that wont get consistantly outperformed by a Minotaur at level 7-8.
It seems like it will be bigger, do more damage, take damage better, and have a stronger battlefield precence with reach and size bonuses.

[Inevitability]

Mummy

Today's monster is a mid-level undead with a paralysis ability and too many HD. Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

A mummy's 8 undead HD are partially compensated by its 24 strength. They also have wisdom and charisma bonuses, in addition to an impressive amount of natural armor for what's essentially a dried-out corpse. DR 5/- doesn't hurt either. Less great are the 20 ft. movement speed and fire vulnerability.

Mummies have two further special abilities. Mummy Rot isn't awful for a disease: the short incubation time may mean it's actually relevant within a battle, and its effects are severe enough to matter should infected foes escape. It's still a disease, though.

Despair is much better: the first time a day something spots you, it must make a saving throw or be paralyzed for several rounds, no actions on your part needed. It may make visiting towns awkward, but in combat it's quite nice. Fear immunity may or may not work here.

That said, I think mummies deserve +0 LA. Their reasonable chassis is made considerably better by Despair, and they should be able to keep up with a normal party.

Nagas are next!

[Inevitability]

And unless we are talking about really high opt builds, then i really cant see what sort of melee characters that wont get consistantly outperformed by a Minotaur at level 7-8.
It seems like it will be bigger, do more damage, take damage better, and have a stronger battlefield precence with reach and size bonuses.

The trouble is that in these comparisons, class levels are almost always undervalued. Rage is great. Maneuvers and stances are great. Arcane casting on top of full BAB is great. 2-level dips in obscure PrCs are great. Even fighter bonus feats are valuable, in their own way.

Obviously, minotaurs will appear too strong when compared to a human with nothing but a weapon, some feats, and full BAB. In practice, any melee warrior worth comparing to will have abilities the minotaur doesn't have.

[khadgar567]

agreed with mummys -0 LA

[Celestia]

1. Play a mummy
2. Take Improved Grapple
3. Latch onto people after they are paralyzed by Despair
4. ???
5. Profit!

[khadgar567]

1. Play a mummy
2. Take Improved Grapple
3. Latch onto people after they are paralyzed by Despair
4. ???
5. Profit!

you have a problem how you gonna grapple the mob in first place_

[Zancloufer]

you have a problem how you gonna grapple the mob in first place_

Paralyzed people tend to not put up much resistance to a grapple. . .

[danielxcutter]

Paralyzed people tend to not put up much resistance to a grapple. . .

Freedom of Movement does, though. It could make for an interesting encounter, though... what was the CR for these guys again?

[Thurbane]

Let's see...

* RHD, poor BAB: at LA+0, you can still hit +16 BAB by 20th. Undead immunities are always nice.

Str +14, Int -4, Wis +4, Cha +4; not bad for a melee build. As always, any Int penalty hurts pretty much everyone; again, skills matter. Might be decent stat array for Crusader, Paladin, or Swordsage (Swordsage won't hit +16 BAB, thoguh). No Con sucks for melee, unless you can get Unholy Toughness or similar.

+10 natural AC: not bad for a melee build

Mummy Rot: fast enough incubation to have a small effect on a battle that lasts over a minute; to be fair, these are pretty rare, especially at mid to high levels. Meh.

Good distance, at will, multi-target paralysis attack ,DC scales with HD/level (depending on your reading of whether class levels count or not); Cha based (being undead, you'll want decent Cha for a bunch of stuff). I'd say this is a pretty darn good ability. Paralyzed for even 1 round can often mean death. Can't be switched off for allies through. I'm assuming this counts as a fear effect, from the description. Immunity to fear becomes ever more common.

I'd be happy to give the Mummy LA +0 in the context of this thread.

[Amidus Drexel]

Can't be switched off for allies through. I'm assuming this counts as a fear effect, from the description. Immunity to fear becomes ever more common.

I'd be happy to give the Mummy LA +0 in the context of this thread.

You just need to get your allies early in the morning, and then you should be set for the rest of the day. One at a time, if you're particularly paranoid.

Yeah, I'm on the fence for +0 and -0 here; on one hand, they have a lot of really nice defensive abilities (undead traits, DR 5/-, and +10 natural armor), plus a couple of strong albeit situational offensive abilities (despair and mummy rot) and an excellent stat spread (notably, a nonability lets you easily dump a stat without penalty). On the other hand, undead HD are awful for just about everyone, and mummies get eight of them - they're also slow and flammable. Vulnerability to fire probably won't be a big issue unless you're going up against people packing searing spell metamagics and the like - anyone who plays a mummy will probably be investing in gear that grants them resistance or immunity to fire (and since it's the most common type of energy damage, that's not really a niche investment) - hell, even the stock SRD mummy lord with 10 cleric levels (????) has a ring of energy resistance.

You'll have low hit points unless you spend a lot of resources bringing those up, but your high AC and DR will go a long way towards mitigating damage from physical attacks (and should you so desire, your strength is high enough to keep your damage output up even if you're using a shield). You'll have mediocre/awful Fortitude/Reflex saves (respectively) unless you do a lot of multiclassing. Disintegrate will be a big problem (as it is for basically all SR-less undead), but you're immune to almost everything else that requires a Fortitude or a Will save. Fireballs and breath weapons will hurt a lot, but unless you're fighting a disproportionate amount of sorcerers and red dragons you probably don't have but so much to worry about in that department.

Would I play a mummy/fighter/barbarian/crusader instead of a level 8, 10, 12, 16, 20 character of some other build? Quite possibly - it's not so bad as to be unviable against level-appropriate challenges. I can see a crusader/barbarian mummy being at least competitive with some other tanky frontline fighters. I think I'll toss my hat in for +0.

[Blue Jay]

Tangential note: I was perusing your archive, and noticed that your link for the zelekhut goes to the post for the marut.

[Thurbane]

You just need to get your allies early in the morning, and then you should be set for the rest of the day. One at a time, if you're particularly paranoid.

Yeah, I'm on the fence for +0 and -0 here; on one hand, they have a lot of really nice defensive abilities (undead traits, DR 5/-, and +10 natural armor), plus a couple of strong albeit situational offensive abilities (despair and mummy rot) and an excellent stat spread (notably, a nonability lets you easily dump a stat without penalty). On the other hand, undead HD are awful for just about everyone, and mummies get eight of them - they're also slow and flammable. Vulnerability to fire probably won't be a big issue unless you're going up against people packing searing spell metamagics and the like - anyone who plays a mummy will probably be investing in gear that grants them resistance or immunity to fire (and since it's the most common type of energy damage, that's not really a niche investment) - hell, even the stock SRD mummy lord with 10 cleric levels (????) has a ring of energy resistance.

You'll have low hit points unless you spend a lot of resources bringing those up, but your high AC and DR will go a long way towards mitigating damage from physical attacks (and should you so desire, your strength is high enough to keep your damage output up even if you're using a shield). You'll have mediocre/awful Fortitude/Reflex saves (respectively) unless you do a lot of multiclassing. Disintegrate will be a big problem (as it is for basically all SR-less undead), but you're immune to almost everything else that requires a Fortitude or a Will save. Fireballs and breath weapons will hurt a lot, but unless you're fighting a disproportionate amount of sorcerers and red dragons you probably don't have but so much to worry about in that department.

Would I play a mummy/fighter/barbarian/crusader instead of a level 8, 10, 12, 16, 20 character of some other build? Quite possibly - it's not so bad as to be unviable against level-appropriate challenges. I can see a crusader/barbarian mummy being at least competitive with some other tanky frontline fighters. I think I'll toss my hat in for +0.

Excellent points: in my rush, I missed a few things: namely DR 5/- and vulnerability to fire.

As opponent damage gets higher, DR 5/- becomes increasingly less relevant. At ECL 8, it's OK(ish) but nothing to write home about.

You'll want to get onto that vulnerability to fire ASAP; without Con your HP are already going to be hurting, and your Ref save is likely to suck. You'll want to buddy up to the casters in your party for Protection From Energy/Resist Energy, and/or invest in items for similar effects. Of all the energy attacks a typical party encounters, fire is usually the most common by quite some distance.

Taking these into account, I'm still OK with LA +1.

[GreatWyrmGold]

No potions of Enlarge Person, though.

Oh, right. I always forget that caveat...