The LA-assignment thread V: Escape from LA

[Covenant12]

I agree with the potential as an interesting BBEG minion/mount at their CR. At their RHD though?

LA: -0 for both, by a long ways.

[Zancloufer]

Epic amount of HD is pretty much unplayable.

I think a big issue that this thread has is the whole 1 RHD = 1 ECL. While you can get some wonky CRs (usually with "non-associated class levels") the 3.5 team wasn't too bad on CR balance overall. Most RHD only cost 0.25 CR per HD meaning a pile of bad HD does not make a threatening monster. Not sure why they made most RHD so bad and then made Dragon/Outsider almost borked (2:1 ratio for those might almost be OP).

Not sure how a CR = ECL would work but I almost wonder at this point if it would give us more "playable" monsters.

[Nifft]

[CENTER]Mivilorn

Because between hell hounds, howlers, yeth hounds, and death dogs there weren't quite enough supernatural evil canines.

WotC just wants us to know that most dogs go to Hell.


From a PC perspective, these bad dogs are truly bad. LA -0 / -0 respectively.

[Aniikinis]

-0 for both. Useful as a mount, but not a PC.

[Blue Jay]

Epic amount of HD is pretty much unplayable.

I think a big issue that this thread has is the whole 1 RHD = 1 ECL. While you can get some wonky CRs (usually with "non-associated class levels") the 3.5 team wasn't too bad on CR balance overall. Most RHD only cost 0.25 CR per HD meaning a pile of bad HD does not make a threatening monster. Not sure why they made most RHD so bad and then made Dragon/Outsider almost borked (2:1 ratio for those might almost be OP).

Not sure how a CR = ECL would work but I almost wonder at this point if it would give us more "playable" monsters.

I did a little bit of this for MM dragons over at Myth-Weavers. The idea was to fit the abilities and features of a CR~20 dragon into a 20-level class. I have no idea how well I did, though.

I also made a bunch of Savage progressions using Reassigned LA's for MM monsters. No idea how good these are, either.

I'm not very comfortable with the formatting here at the Playground, so I don't really know how to convert them.

-----

Also, mivilorn LA -0 (both types). Could be a good mount, but anyone riding one would look much less silly riding just about anything else: that's a really goofy-looking dog.

[ViperMagnum357]

Mivilorn: LA -0 for both of them. Ick. Not much else to say about 24 RHD with the abilities of 10 RHD.

[Zaq]

-0 for both. Useful as a mount, but not a PC.

I’m not sure I’d even go that far. You ever try to maneuver a Huge critter around a battlefield? Even if you’re not in an actual dungeon, there’s lots of ways for a battlefield that isn’t basically an open field to be less than accessible to a Huge thing.

Not going to be a problem every single day, but it’s a problem a noticeable amount of the time. Because, you know, mounted combat needed to be harder for some reason.

(I guess that this argument is, to be fair, relatively GM-dependent. But I like complex and full battlefields and tend to request the same when I feel like I have any pull to do so, so that colors my interpretation. No-items-Fox-only-Final-Destination is boring to me!)

But yeah. Trivial -0. I’m basically comfortable saying that anything (yeah, ANYTHING) that starts in Epic and doesn’t have the ability to immediately qualify for Epic spellcasting (or some equivalent—maybe, MAYBE divine ranks) is -0.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Because between hell hounds, howlers, yeth hounds, and death dogs there weren't quite enough supernatural evil canines.

You forgot winter wolves and legally-distinct-from-wargs.

Not sure why they made most RHD so bad and then made Dragon/Outsider almost borked (2:1 ratio for those might almost be OP).

Because dragons are awesome. And angels, demons, slaadi, etc are pretty impressive, too, but they have planar aid for that.

Not sure how a CR = ECL would work but I almost wonder at this point if it would give us more "playable" monsters.

Also more broken monsters. As WotC has repeatedly (and, for once, correctly) noted, the factors which make a monster capable of ruining a player's day are not the same as those which make a player ruin a DM's day. A 1/day ability and an at-will ability aren't much different for CR, but it can make a big difference for ECL. (To say nothing of things like flight or not having hands, which are barely more than flavor for most monster encounters but drastically change how a PC plays.)

WotC just wants us to know that most dogs go to Hell.

You take that back.
But seriously, with the ratio of evil monsters to good, it's no wonder the Balance is constantly tipping sinister.

[unseenmage]

...

Not sure how a CR = ECL would work but I almost wonder at this point if it would give us more "playable" monsters.

Pathfinder uses CR as ECL.

We use it for our games. Usually my monster characters are weaker overall. Though the campaign where another player played a ghoul showcased the other side of that coin.

Even then though their superpowers and extra hp didn't scale well against the truly high level threats late game.

[Thurbane]

24RHD wihtout some impressive innate casting or equally game changing ability is pretty much an automatic LA -0 from me.

Because between hell hounds, howlers, yeth hounds, and death dogs there weren't quite enough supernatural evil canines.

You forgot winter wolves and legally-distinct-from-wargs.

There's also charnel hound, gravehound, guulvorg, shadow mastiffs, thrym hound, void hounds and vorr.

...and I'm almost sure there's more lurking out there.

[Flickerdart]

Not sure how a CR = ECL would work but I almost wonder at this point if it would give us more "playable" monsters.

If you wanted to go hard on the "ECL is less than HD" thing without breaking the rules of the game, you could do something like Turn Resistance but for beef: for the purposes of effects that care about hit dice, this monster has +X hit dice, and +X to these skills, +X hit points, X feats, and so on. But it would need massive tweaking to work and I'm not sure it's worth it.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Yet again, I want to throw together a spreadsheet which lets me quickly calculate (or at least closely estimate) the effects that losing X hit dice of type Y, then use that to figure out how many HD you'd need to chop off of these creatures before they become plausible character choices.

[javcs]

Yet again, I want to throw together a spreadsheet which lets me quickly calculate (or at least closely estimate) the effects that losing X hit dice of type Y, then use that to figure out how many HD you'd need to chop off of these creatures before they become plausible character choices.

Offhand, I'd say at least 10 RHD, probably closer to 20 RHD.

[Inevitability]

Necronaut

Please consider the following excerpts from the necronaut's entry:

Gargantuan Undead (Chaotic, Evil, Extraplanar)

Environment: Infinite Layers of the Abyss

Alignment: Always chaotic evil

Necronauts are created by demons

A necronaut speaks Infernal and rarely bothers to learn other languages.

Welcome to WotC, where double-checking whether you got the right fiendish language is taboo.


Anyways, other than that the necronaut is a fairly uninteresting monster. It has a fairly unoriginal 'eat corpse to get HP back' ability, Trample, Unholy Toughness, and a weird vulnerability to undead-creating spells, all of which is made meaningless by 32 undead RHD. -0 LA unless this somehow loses a few dozen hit dice.

also why couldn't a 'necronaut' have been an undead astronaut? they wasted a perfectly good name!

[Inevitability]

Needletooth Swarm

Because life is pain and RHD plentiful, have another update!

It's a swarm, it's tiny (which is the worst size a swarm can have), it consists of animals, and it's got eleven RHD. Its sole interesting ability is Wounding, which is hilariously insignificant at this level.

Seriously though: just play a bat swarm and get basically the same package with flight, immunity to weapon damage, blindsense, and eight less RHD.

Obvious -0, Jurassic Park II reference value aside.

[OgresAreCute]

Yet again, I want to throw together a spreadsheet which lets me quickly calculate (or at least closely estimate) the effects that losing X hit dice of type Y, then use that to figure out how many HD you'd need to chop off of these creatures before they become plausible character choices.

Making RHD = CR without reducing other stats or abilities would be a good starting point for many creatures probably.


And yeah both the Bone-Cone and the Feral Chicken Gang are pretty much unplayably bad. -0 for both.

[Mike Miller]

Please consider the following excerpts from the necronaut's entry:
(Quotes)

Welcome to WotC, where double-checking whether you got the right fiendish language is taboo.

That made me laugh. And facepalm.

Both -0

[Aniikinis]

These both suck. -0.

[Zaq]

I recall the needletooth swarm having a reputation as being OP/imbalanced in either 4e or 5e, but that obviously isn’t because they made for OP 3.5 PCs.

Consider the necronaut’s picture for a moment. See how it’s grasping a humanoid, who appears to be itty-bitty in comparison? Consider the size of said humanoid’s head and the skull it must contain, then consider the size of the skull-shaped objects that appear to make up the necronaut’s body. The skull-shaped objects appear to mostly be made up of roughly human-skull-shaped skulls, nothing super-obviously fiendish or aberrant or so on.

I’m forced to conclude that necronauts are made entirely by running through endless iterations of the “Against the Giants” module.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Please consider the following excerpts from the necronaut's entry:

Welcome to WotC, where double-checking whether you got the right fiendish language is taboo.

No, necronauts are just a-holes. They spend all their time fighting in the Nine Hells, and tell their overlords that if they want to go to Hell, they should speak the language.

also why couldn't a 'necronaut' have been an undead astronaut? they wasted a perfectly good name!

It's out-of-genre. Now, an undead sailor, or a sailor on the Underworld's rivers...

[Celestia]

No, necronauts are just a-holes. They spend all their time fighting in the Nine Hells, and tell their overlords that if they want to go to Hell, they should speak the language.


It's out-of-genre. Now, an undead sailor, or a sailor on the Underworld's rivers...

A sailor could have worked. If I'm not making stuff up, I believe that "astronaut" is specifically a corruption of "Argonaut."

[liquidformat]

Necronauts remind me of the sacrificial bone alters from Warlock in the world of wizards (really cool book for anyone that wants to check it out) in which they were platforms to spawn evil demon undead. But ya that thing is bad unless you are using it as your alter for performing necromancy in which case having an alter that can kill things is kind of cool. Also sacrifices and similar stuff is to complicated and involved for your average demon spawn of the abyss so I am ok with the language... -0 for it anyway.

I think the needletooth could be a cool familiar if they stat'ed up a single one especially for a more tribal caster, but the swarm is horrabad.

[Nifft]

Yeah these aren't really worth much discussion. LA -0, next.

also why couldn't a 'necronaut' have been an undead astronaut? they wasted a perfectly good name!

Atropus (the undead visitor moon) from Elder Evils would have been the perfect setting for undead astronauts.

I mean you literally go into space to visit an airless moon for the final confrontation.

Wasted opportunity indeed.

[ExLibrisMortis]

A sailor could have worked. If I'm not making stuff up, I believe that "astronaut" is specifically a corruption of "Argonaut."

It's not. From Ancient Greek, "astron" (ἄστρον) is "star" and "nautes" (ναύτης) means "sailor"--it's a compound after the pattern of aquanaut and aeronaut (and of course, Argonaut follows the same pattern).

I think the excerpts from the necronaut's description say enough: LA -0. And the same for the needletooths. I started thinking that necronauts might be up there as deserving the highest negative LA... but then I thought of the tarrasque.

[ViperMagnum357]

LA -0 for both of these. blech

[unseenmage]

These both suck. -0.

Agreeing. Heartily. -0 for both.

[javcs]

Concur, -0 for the both of them.

The Night Twist is next, and looks to be at least a little more interesting to discuss.

[Random Sanity]

The necronaut looks like something from a horror-themed tower defense game.

And that's about the only use I can see for either monster. -0/-0

[Thurbane]

Completely agree LA -0 in both cases.

[GreatWyrmGold]

It's not. From Ancient Greek, "astron" (ἄστρον) is "star" and "nautes" (ναύτης) means "sailor"--it's a compound after the pattern of aquanaut and aeronaut (and of course, Argonaut follows the same pattern).

Aside from the fact that they were sailing using the Argo, not through it.