The LA-assignment thread: Making monster PCs VI-able

[Zaq]

There's been two Greater monsters that didn't get an LA -0; the Greater Barghest and the Greater Shadow.

And while it didn’t use the actual word “greater,” the splinterwaif knave walked away with +0, so there’s probably one or two others (at least) that a simple ctrl-F for “greater” would miss.

But yeah, for the purposes of this thread, RHD advancement is bad 99% of the time.

[Flickerdart]

Of the various schools of monster design (who never talk to one another and never admit they exist) there seems to be one that likes to make punching bag monsters. Reasonable-sounding offensive abilities, easy to hit, but a metric ton of beef. Raw hit dice stacking is an easy way to turn any monster into a punching bag monster, and WotC likes them a lot because players get to feel accomplished when they hit the thing, but can't one-shot it to take away that satisfaction from the other players. The same works the other way around: weak attacks threaten a PC without one-shotting them.

For obvious reasons, these monsters make terrible PCs themselves.

[danielxcutter]

Of the various schools of monster design (who never talk to one another and never admit they exist) there seems to be one that likes to make punching bag monsters. Reasonable-sounding offensive abilities, easy to hit, but a metric ton of beef. Raw hit dice stacking is an easy way to turn any monster into a punching bag monster, and WotC likes them a lot because players get to feel accomplished when they hit the thing, but can't one-shot it to take away that satisfaction from the other players. The same works the other way around: weak attacks threaten a PC without one-shotting them.

For obvious reasons, these monsters make terrible PCs themselves.

It's not a terrible idea in terms of monster design, I'd say, especially since most monsters weren't made to be PCs in the first place.

[Thurbane]

As a DM, I like to use "wall of meat" type encounters; but the problem is, unless they have immunities or resistances, as soon as the party gets access to a Will or Reflex based save-or-lose, they become more or less useless...

[danielxcutter]

As a DM, I like to use "wall of meat" type encounters; but the problem is, unless they have immunities or resistances, as soon as the party gets access to a Will or Reflex based save-or-lose, they become more or less useless...

So a monster with good defenses compared to offensive capabilities, presuming it doesn't make the battle a boring grind, makes for a fun monster to fight?

[GreatWyrmGold]

But yeah, for the purposes of this thread, RHD advancement is bad 99% of the time.

It's like a class level, but without any class features.

...Raw hit dice stacking is an easy way to turn any monster into a punching bag monster, and WotC likes them a lot because players get to feel accomplished when they hit the thing, but can't one-shot it to take away that satisfaction from the other players. The same works the other way around: weak attacks threaten a PC without one-shotting them.

Of course, this isn't unique to D&D. In fact, D&D is one of the less-extreme versions.

As a DM, I like to use "wall of meat" type encounters; but the problem is, unless they have immunities or resistances, as soon as the party gets access to a Will or Reflex based save-or-lose, they become more or less useless...

Beyond that, it's easy for walls of meat to become repetitive and samey. There's only so much players can do to make trading full attacks interesting.

[Thurbane]

So a monster with good defenses compared to offensive capabilities, presuming it doesn't make the battle a boring grind, makes for a fun monster to fight?

Pretty much, yeah.

Beyond that, it's easy for walls of meat to become repetitive and samey. There's only so much players can do to make trading full attacks interesting.

Also true.

---

One of the most annoying things I find is that by the time that monsters like most standard Giants come on line (as a CR appropriate fight), the party already has abilities that make the fight a cakewalk. Unless you slap class levels or templates on them (and push their CR up further)...which kind of defeats the point.

I like a mix of encounters for the parties I DM, but I do like the occasional melee grind type encounter.

[javcs]

There's been two Greater monsters that didn't get an LA -0; the Greater Barghest and the Greater Shadow.

And while it didn’t use the actual word “greater,” the splinterwaif knave walked away with +0, so there’s probably one or two others (at least) that a simple ctrl-F for “greater” would miss.

But yeah, for the purposes of this thread, RHD advancement is bad 99% of the time.

Ah, but while both of those have a positive LA, their LA values are lower than the baseline version.

As such, while they have a positive LA, it is not an increased LA over the baseline, which was the original question.

[OgresAreCute]

Ah, but while both of those have a positive LA, their LA values are lower than the baseline version.

As such, while they have a positive LA, it is not an increased LA over the baseline, which was the original question.

Well, "greater" usually means "advanced by 8-12 RHD" which also sometimes brings with it some stat boosts or a size increase. Obviously, no PC is going to spend 8 HD on +8 STR and some natural armor, so they are pretty much invariably lower LA (unless you ask WotC, in which case more stat boosts = more LA regardless of how many RHD you pay for it).

[Inevitability]

Stonesinger

If this is a stonesinger, does that mean it likes rock music?

Jokes aside, I actually really like this monster! It's got an uncanny design that in my opinion shows what an aberration should be like, it is truly weird to interact with, and it's got cool special abilities. The only remaining question: does it make a good PC?

Sadly, nine aberration HD make me think the answer to that is going to be 'no'. Large size is decent, the ability scores are decent (20 strength, 18 constitution and charisma, 16 intelligence, 10 wisdom and dexterity), DR 5/magic is kinda meh. The critter has various movement modes, but they're all on the slow side.

In terms of natural attacks, it has six 1d6 claws and a 2d6 bite. The bite also injects a very interesting poison that deals low dexterity damage but completely fossilizes creatures reduced to 0 dex by it. It's not too useful on a PC, but nothing if not flavorful.

Next is Shattering Shriek, which lets the stonesinger deal 12d6 nonlethal damage by making a Perform(Sing) check that exceeds the target's touch AC (apparently, being nimble allows you to dodge sound in D&D). If the target fails a saving throw, it's also stunned for 1d6 rounds, making this a decent save-or-suck. Sadly, its use is limited to once every 5 rounds.

The stonesinger's SLAs are reasonable. 3/day Meld Into Stone and Stone Shape have their uses, and 1/day Wall of Stone is pretty great BFC.

Overall, I'm just not sure this is worth +0 LA. Maybe it if had a few less RHD, or a somewhat better chassis, it'd be worth it, but right now I feel like this monster is just a poor attempt at a BFC caster.

[remetagross]

Yeah, -0 LA. This thing has a particularly horrible design. As for its abilities, they're much better than a bunch of what other 9-HDers have brought to the table, and the diversity of what it can attempt to do is neat. But yeah, maybe at 5 HDs, not so much at 9.

[danielxcutter]

Seven attacks? Probably not going to bring this up to LA +0, but bonus damage(ie. Sneak Attack) could build up a lot, especially with (Improved) Rapidstrike.

[Random Sanity]

Seven natural attacks sounds nice, but at ECL-"you're starting to run into stuff with DR on a semi-regular basis", they kinda lose a lot of their oomph.

Also, this thing has basically nothing on the defensive side; really, how many things in the game have trouble hitting a 21 AC by level 9?

[Hackulator]

Seven natural attacks sounds nice, but at ECL-"you're starting to run into stuff with DR on a semi-regular basis", they kinda lose a lot of their oomph.

Also, this thing has basically nothing on the defensive side; really, how many things in the game have trouble hitting a 21 AC by level 9?

Well, it has DR/Magic, so its attacks defeat DR/Magic.

If it was a PC, you could drop pretty much all those godawful feat selections for stuff that might help you, except probably multiattack. It's stats would of course be even higher because most games start you with better than an array of 10s, so it's DCs should go up. Although it doesn't specify it per se in the descriptive text, I would argue given that it eats rocks it's burrow speed should work through stone, which is actually a pretty powerful ability. Poison whose DC scales with HD as this one clearly should is pretty good. Use some WBL to shore up it's weaknesses and accentuate it's strengths and I'd say a good player could play this at 9th level at most tables and contribute. Hell, there are so many situations I have been in in games where the ability to burrow through stone would have solved things that I think that alone is almost enough to make it playable.

I give it a +0, with the caveat that in most games it would be difficult to play because of RP reasons, as people would run screaming or try to murder you any time you went into town.

[unseenmage]

... Although it doesn't specify it per se in the descriptive text, I would argue given that it eats rocks it's burrow speed should work through stone, which is actually a pretty powerful ability. ...

Just because I eat steak does not mean I can burrow through steak.

The eating apparatus and the burrowing apparatus are likely to be separate bits.

[Hackulator]

Just because I eat steak does not mean I can burrow through steak.

The eating apparatus and the burrowing apparatus are likely to be separate bits.

I bet you could in fact burrow through steak, albeit slowly.

[Lapak]

A Burrow speed through flesh of even 10' per round would make a monster nearly unstoppable. Why deal hit point damage when you can just drill a hole through people?

[liquidformat]

Both seem like solid -0 though Stonesinger doesn't seem far off from +0...

[ViperMagnum357]

Stonesinger: Above average natural AC for 9 RHD, and net +32 abilities are just below par-acceptable on about 8 RHD. DR 5/Magic means its natural attacks bypass DR/Magic, so you can scrimp on the necklace for a while. 7 natural attacks with average base damage have potential, while the decent poison and SLAs are solid.

However, this thing loses 3 points of BAB and has 9 levels of 2 poor saves and 2+Int skills, so it compares poorly to most natural attack builds that got their extra attacks through PRCs or quality templates. It is also rather slow, even with the extra movement modes-its base land and climb speed are 10-20 feet per round slower than average for such a multi-ped, but the burrow speed alleviates that somewhat. And the usual disclaimer about no obvious hands and odd body slots.

Overall, I am leaning towards an almost playable LA -0. I think you could shave as little as a single RHD to get something on par, albeit with the usual DM caveat about critters with no obvious manipulator limbs.

[Thurbane]

Less HD, I'd be happy to give this LA +0. 9 Aberration HD? Yeah, LA -0, unfortunately.

[GreatWyrmGold]

(unless you ask WotC, in which case more stat boosts = more LA regardless of how many RHD you pay for it).

Stat boosts make you stronger, above and beyond the benefits of getting the RHD. They're additional features, why should you get features for free when you take levels?
Darn, I never managed to work the word "class" into there...

Next is Shattering Shriek, which lets the stonesinger deal 12d6 nonlethal damage by making a Perform(Sing) check that exceeds the target's touch AC (apparently, being nimble allows you to dodge sound in D&D).

That makes...only slightly less sense than a Reflex save for half damage.
Anyways, the Shattering Shriek is a good way to open encounters. Skill checks are pretty easy to boost, and most enemies will have mediocre touch ACs (because there aren't a lot of ways to boost those, especially for enemies which tend towards big-tough-and-clumsy), meaning that they immediately lose about 72 hit points. The stunning and not-killing-enemies-you-don't-want-to is just gravy.
...That said, I have no idea where you'd go after that, either in the sense of "What do you do on round 2" or "What do you do at level 10". Maybe you could go rogue, try to get some sneak attacks on the stunned enemies? I'm not sure that one (maybe two) big stunning blasts per combat and potentially some d6 sneak attacks are going to compete with what humanod rogues or even single-classed fighters are going to do with equal consistency, let alone what happens when even low-tier casters break out the big guns. Out of combat, they're not completely devoid of utility, but their special abilities are pretty situational and arguably counterbalanced by the lack of hands.

A Burrow speed through flesh of even 10' per round would make a monster nearly unstoppable. Why deal hit point damage when you can just drill a hole through people?

This discussion got weird fast.

[Zaq]

I’m trying to justify going above -0 on the stonesinger. It has a few interesting standard actions and enough natural attacks to inform a build, but like GWG said, it’s hard to think of what you want your class levels to be. Maybe something with sneak attack? That many Craven-boosted swings per round will be noticeable if you can get HiPS or something, but don’t ask me how to do that. Maybe a Tiger Claw user? The SLAs are actually semi-decent, which helps a lot.

Hmm. May have to give up for now. It’s just outside the range where this is salvageable, I think.

[Unavenger]

A Burrow speed through flesh of even 10' per round would make a monster nearly unstoppable. Why deal hit point damage when you can just drill a hole through people?

Sure, I'll keep that in mind next time I'm fighting an earth elemental if I have a burrow speed. I didn't think, up until now, that it needed saying that being able to burrow through something that isn't trying to fight back is not the same as being able to murder someone.

[javcs]

It's a -0. Not terribly far from being at the bottom end of +0, but there's little in the way of the scaling, and there's not really a clear progression path forwards.

9RHD hurts a lot, and any builds that rely on spamming attacks (you do have 7 natural attacks) usually rely heavily on class levels for bonus damage and/or getting pouncing abilities.

The Shattering Shriek ability might be more useful if it weren't single target.


Plus the lack of hands.


Makes for an interesting encounter, though.

[remetagross]

Anyways, the Shattering Shriek is a good way to open encounters. Skill checks are pretty easy to boost, and most enemies will have mediocre touch ACs (because there aren't a lot of ways to boost those, especially for enemies which tend towards big-tough-and-clumsy), meaning that they immediately lose about 72 hit points. The stunning and not-killing-enemies-you-don't-want-to is just gravy.

Beware, 12d6 on average yields 42, not 72 which is 12d6 at a maximum. Still powerful, mind you, but 72 would have been enough to outright knock down ennemy rogues and casters.

[Lapak]

Sure, I'll keep that in mind next time I'm fighting an earth elemental if I have a burrow speed. I didn't think, up until now, that it needed saying that being able to burrow through something that isn't trying to fight back is not the same as being able to murder someone.

I was definitely being serious and not at all trying to make a joke when I posted right after the person talking about steak.

But with regard to the Stonesinger, yeah, -0. I could see +0 at 6 or 7 HD, maybe, but 9 Abberation HD demands some really good features in return, not just a one-shot single-target blast and an admittedly-good natural attack routine that you could pick up for fewer HD and/or class levels.

[PoeticallyPsyco]

For what class this critter should be taking, probably Totemist. Heart of fire and dread carapace add some nice damage to all of those natural attacks, and other soulmelds provide some utility. Maybe dip barbarian for pounce, and if you need higher level chakras unlocked there're the Unlock Chakra feats.

That said, I'm not savvy enough to say whether the Stonesinger's natural attacks, abilities, and movement make it roughly equivalent to a totemist 9.

[Covenant12]

I like some of the abilities, but I tentatively vote -0.

Decent stats, good NA, 7 attacks, but 9 bad RHD. Wall of stone is never useless, but its 1/day and the spell-likes don't scale well. Note that the 2d6 bite took INA to get there, so you have 7 weak attacks. That as noted pierce DR magic, but watch out for golems and the like. Poison is weak but should have a decent DC, based off HD and respectable Con score.

Int 16 is nice even with 2+ skill points/level. Listen and Spot plus 120' darkvision provide a use besides beatstick. (and tunnel-maker with generous DM).

Still seems limited and underwhelming. Definitely watching for someone to pull something I'm not thinking of, swordsage/sneak attack/craven/fire to attacks? It won't be easy, but could be possible. It has inherent 10' reach, I just don't see it excelling at a melee BFC though.

[Efrate]

I really want to give this +0, but i just cannot. 9 aberration hd need a lot of love to be viable. You could do some sort of swordsage totemist and/or rogue with craven and focus on shadow hand for movement. Get pounce via totemist and blend a stunned target. Its a very binary playstyle but its likely usable.

I think I will go -0.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Maybe something with sneak attack? That many Craven-boosted swings per round will be noticeable if you can get HiPS or something, but don’t ask me how to do that.

Personally, I'd try to find some way to consistently get flanks. If only you could take a dip in splinterwaif for their call bramble ability...

Beware, 12d6 on average yields 42, not 72 which is 12d6 at a maximum. Still powerful, mind you, but 72 would have been enough to outright knock down ennemy rogues and casters.

...Yup. Not sure how I screwed up that formula, but I did.