My recommendation is to not worry about that stuff and just stick to the Player's Handbook options until you are comfortable with the 3.5 system. However, to actually answer your question:
In theory, the DM can create a new list of abilities for virtually any racial combo, and I believe many bizarre options are described in a third-party book, Bastards and Bloodlines or some such.
But, for all practical purposes, no. The only half-breeds are half-elves and half-orcs, as far as most games go. These are the same as any other race, and have their own list of preset abilities, which are meant to be a reflection and mix of the other two races. In both cases, as you may be aware, they are mixtures of humans and another race. There are no "ordinary" mixes of two races other than human and something else.
Each character is a member of one race. You are an elf, a human, a gnome, a half-orc, a halfling, etc. Just as you are only one species (human) in real life, your character is only one race in the game.
Templates aren't for first level characters. In fact, they're not really "for" characters at all, though many use them and rules exist to make such characters possible. Technically, any number of templates can be applied to a character, and not all are cross-breeds. Some reflect the result of magical experiments, and other strange things like that.
Each template will state exactly what type of creatures to which it can or cannot be applied. Taking certain templates will change your creature type, and may then make it impossible to gain another template. For example, you can't be both a lich and a vampire, as once you take one, you become undead, and the other can't be applied to an already undead creature.
A template is something that a character typically starts out with if they are ever going to have one, although things like lycanthropy, vampirism, and lichdom can later be conferred by a template (though this is rare, as it complicates the game a lot).
However, if you are just learning the ropes in 3.5, stay away from templates. It's far more hassle than it's worth to begin with, and may even make learning other parts of the system difficult.
To return to an earlier point, the reason that a template generally cannot be applied to a 1st level character is something known as the Level Adjustment (LA). This is a number with a + sign in front of it. For example, a half-celestial template has a +4 LA. What this means is that you have to add all your levels together and then add the LA in to determine the Effective Character Level (ECL), which in turn determines the XP and treasure that you earn from adventuring, and is useful for the DM to make sure all the players are more or less of equal power.
However, this makes it impractical for 1st level characters. For example, if you decided to play as a half-celestial, you would pick a race as normal and then apply the benefits of the half-celestial template, but then you would be the equivalent of a 5th level character (1st level + 4 from LA = 5 ECL).
Typically templates and level adjusted races (another thing to stay away from at this point, but if you must know, you can find them in the Monster Manual and other books) come into play when a higher level character dies, and the player wants the replacement character to have a template. For example, if you were playing a 6th level character, and he died, and the game continued you could then have your next character be a 2nd level half-celestial (2 levels + 4 from LA = 6 ECL).
Notice that you are still lower level. Supposedly, the powers from the template make up for this, but many find that the exact tradeoffs you make aren't worth it for many templates. Thus, even veteran players often stay away from templates and level adjusted races.
I hope that answers your questions. Again, my recommendation is to just play it by the basics in the Player's Handbook until you are comfortable with the rest of the system. Happy gaming!
Most of these questions are going to depend on what your DM sets for the game. Specifically, characters have an Effective Character Level (ECL) that might be equal just to their character class levels, or might be higher if the race chosen is not "standard" like humans, elves, half-orcs, etc. Such races have what is called a Level Adjustment (LA) listed that increases ECL. So a character with 1 level in Fighter of a race with an LA of +2 is an ECL 3 (i.e. the same effective level as a human Fighter 3). Further, if the race has Racial Hit Dice (Racial HD) above 1, then the Racial HD are added to the ECL. So an Ogre Fighter 1 (which has 4d8 HD and an LA of +2) is an ECL 7 character. If your DM has set the ECL to 1, then any race with an LA greater than 0, or with Racial HD greater than 1, is not available.
Many races are in the online SRD in the Monster section.
Templates are also in the Monster section. They modify your race in specific ways and typically add to the LA of your character. Each template specifically lists the types of creatures to which it can be applied.
"Standard" half-races (half-orc, half-elf) cannot be combined without custom rules. They are always half-human, and have standard stats. Template creatures like half-dragons work as the templates described above. You could have a half-elf half-dragon (human/elf/dragon mix).
Bloodlines are a variant rule from Unearthed Arcana (also in the online SRD above, Variant Rules: Races section). Unless the DM specifically allows them, you can't take 'em. If they're allowed, come back and we'll talk, 'cause they can get complicated...
In general, if this is your first time playing 3.5, I'd recommend going with the standard stuff in the PHB. Alternately, describe what type of character you are trying to create and folks here can walk you through the process.
EDIT And what Saern said...to reiterate, you're better off not bothering with this stuff right now!
Director of Sales
|
... describe what type of character you are trying to create and folks here can walk you through the process.
The above is ALL excellent advice, but this is the best advice for a beginner, IMHO.
Just envision the type of character you want to play and then get together with someone more experienced (either your DM or the various savants that populate this board) and then apply the (VASTLY less important) rules stuff.
And remember (once again, IMHO) that it's totally acceptable to take inspiration for a character from an outside source.
(For example: "DUDE! I wanna play Neo... but as an ELF! with a SWORD!")
You just have to keep in mind that these inspirations are just that: Inspirations, not rules. Once the character is created, let it grow organically as a result of it's experiences (i.e. experience points and leveling) and make those choices for your character that you think your character would make based on it's background.
Most of all, remember that the whole point is to have fun.
Oh, missed one item...
In general, you can apply as many Templates to a creature as you want, as long as the creature continues to meet the requirements for each new Template. Certain Template types (called Inherited, i.e. the creature is born this way) are always applied before others (Acquired, i.e. the creature got changed in some way after birth).
However, you're usually going to end up with a mish-mash freak that is much less powerful than a character of similar level (as Saern mentioned above). You could make a half-fiend (LA +4) half-dragon (LA +3) half-orc Fighter 1. It would be equivalent to a Human Fighter 8, and that human is going to destroy this half-freak in a matter of moments...
You could not make a half-dragon vampire, because the Vampire Template is an Acquired Template that can be added to any Humanoid or Monstrous Humanoid creature, and the Half-Dragon Template (an Inherited Template) changes the creature's type to Dragon.
You could not make a half-dragon vampire, because the Vampire Template is an Acquired Template that can be added to any Humanoid or Monstrous Humanoid creature, and the Half-Dragon Template (an Inherited Template) changes the creature's type to Dragon.
...unless DM specifically allows vampirism to affect also Dragon type creatures (and in that case, can i play half-gelatinous cube vampire?).
Basically everything is DM's call but my recommendation both for you and your DM is to start with basics (PHB) and later consider if you want to try something stranger...
Hmm, paladins are a challenging class to play, but they can definitely compete with the other classes. Do you know what source books are valid for the game, and what ECL is being used? Do you have any archetypes in mind (i.e. knight in shining armor), are you looking to play something different (a holy archer or some such, for instance), and how do you "see" the character in your mind (e.g. tall and strong, a smaller person with a big heart (and sword!), etc.). These types of things will help pick a race that would fit thematically.
Now, for some mechanics...
Off-hand, a very Paladin friendly race is the Aasimar. With a +2 Wisdom and +2 Charisma, Darkvision 60', Resistance to acid 5, cold 5, and electricity 5., and favored class of Paladin, they are easy to fit into the holy warrior mold. They are, however, a LA +1 race and so may not be allowed by the DM. Outside this, a Human is a solid racial choice as the bonus feat helps the character pick up more combat ability--a Human Pal1 could take Power Attack and Cleave, for instance, which is a nice starting combo for melee types.
One of the paladin's main strengths as a class is in mounted combat, due to the Special Mount ability they pick up at 5th level. As such, taking feats related to that (Mounted Combat, Ride-By Attack, Spirited Charge, Trample) can be a good choice. However, the Large size of a mount often means they cannot be used in dungeons and such. Choosing a Small race like Halfling or Gnome can allow you to get around this by selecting a Medium mount (a riding dog). This has the trade-off, however, of the smaller character's weapons dealing less damage.
At 4th level and beyond, paladins can pick up feats of the Divine type. These allow the paladin to expend a Turn Undead attempt to gain some other benefit (like adding his Charisma modifier to weapon damage for 1 full round, getting a save bonus, etc.). These are very nice feat choices as a Paladin advances, especially if he's got a high Charisma.
Beyond 5th level, Paladins don't get a lot of variety in their class abilties (Remove Disease, more use of Smite, and more spells). As such, many choose to take a Prestige Class that focuses on the aspects of the paladin they most like. The Cavalier (from Complete Warrior) allows a Paladin focused on mounted combat that deals a tremendous amount of damage when riding, but doesn't gain all the more magical aspects. There are others that focus on battling undead or fiends, enhancing leadership, playing a good "fallen" paladin (i.e. turning to Chaotic Good from Lawful Good), etc. Prestige classes allow the Paladin character to shine in many ways. Of course, another option here is multi-classing to another core class. Fighter is a solid choice, granting lots of bonus feats, and Knight (from the PHB II) mixes well with the paladin image.
Lots of options...
|
...describe what type of character you are trying to create and folks here can walk you through the process.Thanks for the info and advice. I'd like to create a paladin or at least a paladin-type character, but I'm told that paladins aren't so great in 3.5 compared to the other classes, and knowing that the other players are experienced 3.5ers who will take full advantage of all the goodies from the books I don't have to create their characters, I was hoping for some guidance in how to best fortify a paladin so he has the muscle and the staying-power to keep up. Thanks again.
First, paladins are not weak, per se, compared to other base classes. They hold their own alright.
Second, we're happy to help you here on the boards, but, since your group sounds pretty experienced, I recommend asking for their help in generating your character. They will know the group's overall style and how to make your character mesh with the rest of the party.
Well, D&D is not meant to be a competitive game, so your fellow players should help you out with their knoweldge. If they don't, they're being jerks, so don't sweat it.
The only reason I have a cautionary tone in my voice is because they said that paladins are weak. This is a misperception typically brought about by people who don't want to roleplay the character, but rather just exploit the paladin's very nice abilities, and the DM forces them to at least try and conform to the paladin's code of ethics. That's far from a hard and fast rule, but it is a flag to take of which you should take note.
Now, as to a paladin. Paladins fill in the "tank" role of the party excellently. Don't necessarily look to be doing the most damage if you've got a straight fighter or barbarian, or even a sorcerer/wizard or rogue in certain situations. However, your damage will be solid and reliable.
I think paladins work best as "sword and shield" guys- take a nice one handed weapon, like a longsword or battleaxe, or even burn a feat to pick up Exotic Weapon Proficiency (bastard sword), and then strap on a heavy shield and have at it! It doesn't have to be any more complicated than that. Feats like Power Attack and Cleave and Great Cleave are, as mentioned above, golden. If you like the mounted aspect of the paladin, then, again, as mentioned above, take the appropriate feats, but expect to be somewhat compromised if you go into a dungeon.
As an aside, many people also like slapping on a two-handed weapon with their paladin, like a greatsword, and giving up a little AC for increased damage. In this case, Power Attack and the Cleave chain of feats are definitely your friends.
When you get Turn Undead, many feat options open for you. Turning in it's direct form is near useless for paladins except against swarms of weak undead, due to the fact that a paladin's turning is much weaker than a cleric's. However, Divine Might and Divine Shield are great feats that exchange turn attempts for other bonuses (again, see above). The feats were so popular when released in the Complete Warrior that many other supplement books now have a variety of feats that operate in similar fashion which would be good for you.
Back to that tank role- like I said, a heavy shield is what you want, along with a good suite of full plate. Your mobility won't be that great on foot (thus, the mount!), but your AC can be really high (but don't tell Valegrim that ((Jokeing))). You're the type that's going to want to charge to the front lines and get the enemy to attack you, because you're very resistant with your high AC, good hp, and small amount of healing spells and abilities. This frees the rest of the party up to do their schtick without worrying about getting mauled themselves.
Now, as for ability scores. Strength is, of course, vital for a melee combatant. Constitution is usually next on the list, but for paladins, Charisma typically assumes a higher priority. This increases your saves starting at 2nd level (making you even harder to kill) and gives you more turning attempts and makes your divine feats all that more powerful when/if you take them. Then comes Constitution or Wisdom. To fully realize all your paladin-ness, you're going to need a Wisdom of 14 (though going higher doesn't benefit you much). You can start with lower, though, and increase it through magic items and/or ability score boost every 4th level.
Constitution follows or ties Wisdom for importance. Intelligence isn't that big a deal for you, although roleplaying a dunce of a paladin can be awkward. Dexterity is your dump stat, since you're going to be wearing heavy armor, although if you have the rolls for it (if you aren't using point-buy), putting a 12 or 13 in there allows you to maximize your AC in full plate.
Human and dwarf are the typical choices for paladin, both for roleplaying reasons and statistics. A human's bonus feat and skill point are always a good thing, making them an eternally good option for any class/race combo. Dwarves take a hit to Charisma, but even reduced, when combined with their +2 on saves vs. spells, spell-like abilities, and poison, and their +2 Constitution and host of other miscellaneous abilities (like getting free proficiency with the dwarven waraxe), they are perhaps the most resilient paladins one can build.
There are several threads in the archives of the boards here talking about the various ways to roleplay paladins without falling into the stereotypical problems, if you're interested. Again, happy gaming!
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Paladins are definitely on the weaker side of the character class divide - I can never bring myself to take one beyond 3rd or 4th level. Their spells are mediocre, I hate the war horse beyond all measure (it's either useless because your in-doors or a pain in the ass because it brings up too many infrequently used rules), and they need a number of good stats (Str, Cha, Con, Wis) to very little effect. Of course, part of the power issue is because they aren't a specialized class. They trade raw power from other random tricks. Whether or not those tricks are worth it depends on how you like to play. If you want to be the spearpoint of the party, pick barbarian or fighter. If you want to be the healer, pick cleric. If you want to fall in the middle, paladin's your guy.
In any event it's not as if you will be worthless. The paladin can hold its own; it's not a commoner. Just don't expect to shine very often.
I've heard of people optimizing them. Most such builds are based on the warhorse. Playing a halfing paladin on a riding dog is one way to enable mounted combat tricks even in a dungeon. The various feats in complete divine that let you convert turning into something useful are also good.
Edit: Which is basically what Erian_7 said.
|
|
I have to disagree with Sebastian on this one: a paladin can be an awesome engine of destruction and can create many good roleplaying situations. You don't have to be the fighter to be good at fighting, and you don't have to be the cleric to be good at healing. The paladin is a bit more defensive than the fighter or barbarian (e.g. the bonuses to saving throws,) but can frequently outlast the opponent that the paladin goes up against. Woe be to the fighter going toe to toe with a paladin when said paladin also has an archer backing him up! A paladin's role is out front, taking most of the heat, while his companions pick apart the enemy with ranged attacks. I have always enjoyed playing paladins, and I also feel that they shine better (as do many classes) when they are not diluted with prestige classes or multi-classes. Regardless of what class you choose, however, you should just roll with it and enjoy yourself!
Oh, and Extra Smiting is so popular a choice that many consider it a "must," similar to Natural Spell with druid. I don't know what book it's in (don't think the PHB), but it allows an extra 2 smites per day.
I'm in the 'Paladin is underpowered' camp. No feats means no real ability to make their attacks optimized. They're barely better then the Aristocrat. Spells are few and far between and weak to boot - warhorse rarely relevant. Only smite evil really is worth a second look. Lay on hands is just not up to snuff. A well designed character should be doing more damage every round then the Paladin can heal. So generally choosing to not attack for a round in order to heal just gets one back where they started. Healed up and lost all the new hps when the enemy whacked you again.
Beyond all of this the Paladin is a pain in the ass to have in an adventuring party. Paladins are spotlight hogs without equal. Much of the time when adventuring with a Paladin one finds that the Paladin player has become the centre of the universe. Either every action the party wants to do has to first be vetted by the Paladin or alternatively the rest of the characters spend their time plotting to hide their actions from the Paladin. Either way the all attention is focused on the Paladin and that, over the long haul, is not really good for the game. This, however, is a pretty easy fix. Simply reconceptualize Paladins to have a better attitude when dealing with the world. If they 'do what it takes' to smite evil instead of insisting that everyone remains squeaky clean while combating evil then its no longer necessary to vet every action with the Paladin or take extraordinary actions to hide ones behaviour from the Paladin. 'Course this does not help if half the party is Chaotic Evil but it does eliminate most of the day to day issues.
That's why I referred to the roleplaying threads about paladins in the archives, the names of which I can't remember at all. You describe the classic problem-paladin, the Stick in the Mud. There is absolutely no reason that a paladin has to be that way, and it is actually a sign of player immaturity, in my mind, when such a problem is encountered (although, it may not be the paladin being immature so much as another party member who has his own preconcieved notions about the class). If someone can post the name of those threads, you can do a search and find out all you need to know about how to make a well mannered, party-friendly paladin.
As an afterthought, I'd also like to state that paladins typically don't make players act "Stick in the Mud"-ish, but rather either attract those with that mindset already (who would be a pain no matter what class they played), or are played that way because someone doesn't understand the concept of the class/alignment and thinks that's the only way to be. Again, Order of the Stick offers surprising insight into this situation. Though not a paladin, Roy is Lawful Good, and hardly a stick in the mud. I wouldn't have a problem with any paladin in my games modelling their behavior after Roy (in fact, I would encourage it).
There's my two bits about paladins.
|
I've been in a position as a paladin where I refused to even worry about any of the issues that cause stick in the mud syndrome; I'd just keep doing my thing and milk paladinhood for all it's worth until the "alignment change" comes, and I'd just say, "okay, hell with it. I can't do this. I'm just a fighter now." I'm not going to try to change the world one thief (rogue for modern players) at a time.
This was back in 1e. days, when being a paladin was worth all the alignment crap--"you should be better than that. You're a paladin." Nowadays, with the balance issues, I frankly can't see the payoff of having to adhere to stricter principles.
This was back in 1e. days, when being a paladin was worth all the alignment crap--"you should be better than that. You're a paladin." Nowadays, with the balance issues, I frankly can't see the payoff of having to adhere to stricter principles.
Here I agree. I did have a player that was a Paladin back in the day as it where and because they where so friggen hard to get it did not seem to be such an issue. I think here it worked partly because all the rest of the players saw themselves as the Paladin's merry band of do-gooders.
This could come up because I was using a strict roll 4d6 drop the lowest – that is your strength stat, repeat and that is your intelligence. The chances of rolling good enough stats to be a Paladin - especially that 17 for Charisma where really really unlikely. So we only ever had one campaign with a Paladin and the rest of the players where willing to play along since this was just such an unusual event.
In the modern version of the game I just can't see this working. I can't even see my current players being willing to forgo their own glory for another players - older and wiser my ass. They've gotten worse as the years go by.
That's why I referred to the roleplaying threads about paladins in the archives, the names of which I can't remember at all.
One of the recent threads dealing with roleplaying was "Paladins and Evil PC's." There was also a thread on prestige class options (many of them suitable for paladins) called "Daemon hunter..."
Strictly from a power standpoint I disagree that Paladins are weak. Immunites and resistances are awesome albeit they do seem to max out at 5th. Paladins are just really hard to move from the front line. They are hard to affect with spells of all types and immune to fear effects. A paladins smite comes into play often and grows at the same rate as his attacks per round making his first round of combat a blaze of glory.
Remove disease however, is stupid. What the hell is the point of that?
As far as roleplaying they are a pain in the ass. I agree with all of the attention hogging aspects listed above.
Lawful Good is a great alignment and is arguably the one most suited for furthering the cause of good (such characters are usually well motivated at least). The paladins code however is the hurdle that your party will constantly be overcomming. They may have told you to stay away because of this and just told you they were weak instead of having to explain the problem.
I have yet to have an enjoyable experiance with a Paladin in the party and am not expecting that to change. I would never play one for the same reason I would never play a frenzied berserker I don't want to be an obstacle for the other players.
I suggest playing a ranger. Pick some universal evil baddies like Undead or Evil Outsiders as your favored enemy and revolve your attitude around eradicating evil.
But thats just me. Your milage may very.
I love playing paladins, but I always play the "grimy on the outside, good on the inside" Rooster Cogburn-types. I get a lot of mileage out of bard/paladins, too (Devoted Performer feat!). The trick is to make them not sanctimonious and not annoying, which is an interesting role-playing challenge sometimes.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Remove disease however, is stupid. What the hell is the point of that?
PHB, p.34 third paragraph under the heading "The Paladin's Code of Honor"
"As part of his code, the paladin must provide tender mercy to the less fortunate, and in particular, ladies of the night (or, knight, as the case may be). Furthermore, a paldin is permitted to accept various 'gratitudes' from any damsels in distress that he may assist."
Read between the lines: Paladins are divine sanctioned players who use their abilities to stomp out STD's. Why do you think Charisma is a key stat?
Remove disease however, is stupid. What the hell is the point of that?
PHB, p.34 third paragraph under the heading "The Paladin's Code of Honor"
"As part of his code, the paladin must provide tender mercy to the less fortunate, and in particular, ladies of the night (or, knight, as the case may be). Furthermore, a paldin is permitted to accept various 'gratitudes' from any damsels in distress that he may assist."
Read between the lines: Paladins are divine sanctioned players who use their abilities to stomp out STD's. Why do you think Charisma is a key stat?
Ok, that was funny!
Anyway, Sexi, my whole post and the point of referring to the other threads, again, is to point out that paladins do not have to be an "obstacle" for the rest of the party, and, I would hazard that 85% of the "obstacle" they present arises from players (the paladin or others) being unnecessarily stubborn. The point of the game is to have fun and engage situations as a group. The thought that a class would be intentionally designed in a way to hinder this seems highly illogical, and is thus, in my mind, most likely a misconception.
Just read the other threads!
Hey, thanks again for all the suggestions. FYI, the reason I was hesitant to ask my fellow players for advice is because the DM asked us to create our characters without knowing what the other players would be playing, so that our choice wouldn't be based on the other players' choices, then he'd fill-in gaps with NPCs if necessary. Well, I decided to play a LG Cleric (War & Protection domains) rather than a Paladin just to avoid potential probs with the code of conduct. The party ended up with two clerics, a ranger and a rogue. Not bad. I think the DM wanted to play a wizard anyway ;)
If you ever decide to try a paladin, take note of the roleplaying hurdles mentioned here and in other threads. The biggest tip is to discuss things ahead of time, so that different interpretations of "what a paladin is" don't get in the way.
As far as combat effectiveness goes, the following feats are almost must-haves: Divine Might (CW; burn a use of Turn Undead to add your Cha mod to all damage for one round), Extra Smiting (CW; add two more smites per day), Improved Initiative (Dex and Int will probably be your dump stats, so this helps), Power Attack (stacking Divine Might, Power Attack, and Smite Evil can cause a lot of damage), and Weapon Focus (probably longsword or another one-handed weapon, take early). Some other feats to look at, depending on what role you want to fill in the party: Disciple of the Sun (CD; if you are the only member of the party with Turn Undead), Divine Shield (CW; spend a use of Turn Undead to add your Cha mod to your shield's AC bonus for 1/2 character level rounds), Glorious Weapons (CD; spend a use of Turn Undead to grant all weapons in 60' good alignment for one round), Improved Critical (combined with Bless Weapon or a weapon with the Blessed special ability and a 19-20 or 18-20 critical range), Improved Smiting (CD; smite becomes good and does an +1d6 damage), Sacred Healing (CD; spend one use of Turn Undead to grant Fast Healing 3 to all living creatures within 60' for 1 + Cha mod rounds), and Sacred Vengeance (CW; spend one use of Turn Undead to add 2d6 damage to all damage vs. undead for one round).
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
If I was to have a 1st level Tiefling Rogue characer..his ECL would be 3 right? (LA +1, HD +1, Rogue 1st Level)
Nope, he's ECL 2. Monsters with a single HD receive a class HD instead. So, you would have 1d6 hit points for being a rogue. But it looks like you've got the basic concept of ECL right, which is a good start.
The character would start out with all bennies from a Tiefling, a Rogue, 1st level feat, skill points X4, and all that. Right?
Yes.
My second question is this...what would be the starting hit point? D6 (Rogue) + D8 (HD)? or just the D6 (Rogue). If you go with just the D6..then why add the +1 from Hit Dice to ECL if you are not going to get the hit points?
I think I answered this above, but ECL is designed to deal with the fact that not all abilities are perfectly correlated with hit dice. The tiefling gets a +1 ECL because at 1st level he has more abilities than a +0 ECL race. To compensate for those abilities, the tiefling gives up a HD and all related benefits (increases to BAB, skill points, etc).
And (third Question), if the character is starting off at 1st level...his EXP would start at 0, and he would not gain a level of Rogue until reaching 6,000 exp, 4th level?
Yes, but its 3rd level, not 4th, you want to look at.
A little help understanding the 1st level thing would be great from any and all.
Hope that helps. Feel free to post again if not.
|
Okay...I too am a newbie to 3.5. I understand all the rules but this little one for 1st level characters and Level Adjustments.
If I was to have a 1st level Tiefling Rogue characer..his ECL would be 3 right? (LA +1, HD +1, Rogue 1st Level)
The character would start out with all bennies from a Tiefling, a Rogue, 1st level feat, skill points X4, and all that. Right?
My second question is this...what would be the starting hit point? D6 (Rogue) + D8 (HD)? or just the D6 (Rogue). If you go with just the D6..then why add the +1 from Hit Dice to ECL if you are not going to get the hit points?
And (third Question), if the character is starting off at 1st level...his EXP would start at 0, and he would not gain a level of Rogue until reaching 6,000 exp, 4th level?
A little help understanding the 1st level thing would be great from any and all.
Ok, 1st level tiefling rogue would have an ECL of 2. LA +1 plus 1 level of rogue. Part of the confusion here is that if a race only has one racial HD, they don't keep it in addition to other levels.
In general, feats, skills, and most things have to do with HD. The ONLY thing that the LA has to do with is how much experience that the character gets and needs to go to the next level. (And it gives the DM a warm fuzzy regarding how powerful the character really is.)
The "starting" hit dice really doesn't matter with the tiefling since they don't really have racial HD. However, if you were to run a gnoll, the "starting" HD would be his racial HD.
Because a 1st level rogue tiefling has an ECL of 2, you are essentially starting him out with 1,000 xp and he gets xp as if he were a 2nd level character.
If you really want information about all of this, I would suggest checking out the Savage Species. As far as balance is concerned in this case, I would let them be a 1st level rogue with everyone else at 1st level, but they wouldn't get to be a 2nd level rogue until they get a total of 3,000 xp.
Hope that this helps.
|
|
In the DMG, page 173, underneath the charts..there is a neat little example
"A monster with a 1HD and a +1LA has two levels of rogue, it's ECL would be 4."
I hadn't seen that before and I feel that it is a lame example.
Look at the examples in the Monster Manual. Also look on page 290 of the Monster Manual --
"Creatures with 1 or less HD replace their monster levels with their character levels. For example, a goblin sorcerer loses its humanoid attack bonus, saving throw bonuses, skills, and feats, and gains the attack bonus, save bonuses, skills, feats, and other class abilities of a 1st level sorcerer."
I don't know of any creatures that would have 1 monster HD and then get class levels.
Correct above, but for further clarification:
Orcs, hobgoblins, goblins, kobolds, etc., are all "humanoids," as defined in the MM (their actual body shape is only theoretically linked to this distinction- a succubus, even though humanoid in form, isn't; sounds like you already understand this, but I'm going for clarity).
Humanoids with only 1 HD always loose it. That's because they don't actually have a racial HD. If you examine 1 HD humanoids, you will find they actually have one level in the NPC "warrior" class. The exact benefits and penalties of playing such a race are typicall listed towards the end of their entry. Planetouched, such as tieflings, also have this listing.
Planetouched are a special case, as they are clearly good and common choices for characters, but they are not humanoids. It's arbitrary, but a planetouched does not keep it's racial "outsider" hit dice because, like orcs and goblins, it doesn't actually have any. Close examination will reveal that those listed in the MM are actually 1st level warriors.
As an aside, I think you will typically find playing a level adjusted race early in one's D&D career to be a bad choice. It doesn't give a solid foundation to understand the principal workings of several abilities. However, that's just and opinion, and you seem to be navigating it fairly well. I will also point out that, at any given level, you will be 1 hit dice below everyone else, which cuts back on some of your tangible benefits and may end up making you weaker than the LA would indicate. Level adjusted races are actually typically weaker than non-level adjusted races, when all things are considered.
The one big perk that you must make sure your DM knows about, because many will overlook it, is that a planetouched is not a humanoid. Spells like charm person and hold person won't work on you, because you are not a "person" as those spells define them. For this reason alone, planetouched may just be as powerful as their level adjustment indicates.
Another interesting perk of Planetouched. As Outsiders they are "Proficient with all simple and martial weapons and any weapons mentioned in its entry." So an aasimar cleric or wizard can wield a greatsword...