Hi - you must be new here :)
Pathfinder does not make use of level-adjusted templates. There are a few monster templates and acquired templates (in Bestiary 1 and 2). The choice to ignore the level-adjustment schemes from 3.5 is deliberate as it is considered flaky and poorly balanced.
|
I dont understand the last part.So how do you balance them for PC use?They aren't balances for PC use. The advice given is to allow each player to take a creature of the same CR (which may include templates), than apply additional class levels.
For example let everyone play a cr 3 with 2 class levels, instead of 5th level characters
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So how do you balance them for PC use?
You make a decision based on your playstyle. Balance is a bugaboo that means so many different things to so many different people that it essentially has no meaning at all.
|
You will need to continue to use the level adjustment rules from 3x for monsters that have racial hit die. I still use the Savage Species book. One of my players made a Janni using that book. To balance his character with the others, I had him use a 15 point buy while the other two party members used a 20 point buy. It has worked well in Kingmaker.
Here is one old thread discussing homebrew monster PC options
the description the the template gives you an addition to the "base creatures" CR, that would be the HD your "base creature" gains, just look at the description of the template, it will give you all the information you need.
Page 312 and 313 in the bestiary have rules for playing monstrous races. Here's a link to it.
In general, it works like this.
If the CR of the creature is 3, then it's a valid monster to be played as a PC as long as the other characters are 3rd level. So, for example, if you have three 3rd level pcs, and someone wants to play a minotaur, then that's about the right power level (I believe a minotaur is CR 3). Racial hit dice is already figured into the CR, so don't add the two.
Every 3 levels, the monster gains an additional class level, up to 1/2 it's CR. For example, the minotaur above would gain a class level at 4th level, and again at 5th level. However, halfway from 5th to 6th, it would gain an extra class level, and then again at 6th level. So at 6th level, it would be a minotaur with 4 class levels while everyone else has 6 class levels. From then on, it would be 2 levels behind everyone else.
If the CR of the creature is 3, then it's a valid monster to be played as a PC as long as the other characters are 3rd level.Characters of level 3 are CR 2.
Yes they are.
But the rules on 312 and 313 specifically state a CR 3 creature can be played in a game with 3rd level characters. I never said the characters were CR 3, I said characters are 3rd level, and the monster is CR 3. Please read the link provided above for the rules.
Probably a better idea to go by HD.
A CR 20 dragon is > 20 level character. By leaps.
CR is a way to calculate the average power of a monster/character. Therefore, your CR 3 monsters will be more powerful then the CR 2 player characters.
I didn't write the rules, though it is my feeling that they are wrong. Though that might just be me.
I've actually used the rules as presented in Bestiary one for 6 months in a monster campaign.
It worked very well, actually.
There ARE level adjustments, Pathfinder just isn't giving them to you. Its looked at the mess of CRs, level adjustments, and concluded that the best judge of what combination should be what level is the dm... in otherwords, eyeball it.
Probably a better idea to go by HD.
A CR 20 dragon is > 20 level character. By leaps.
That's actually an absolutely AWFUL idea. Sorry. Most racial hit dice levels are inferior even to NPC levels. Would you consider someone with 3 levels of commoner and two levels of Ranger to be equal to a 5th level ranger? Of course not.
That's actually an absolutely AWFUL idea. Sorry. Most racial hit dice levels are inferior even to NPC levels. Would you consider someone with 3 levels of commoner and two levels of Ranger to be equal to a 5th level ranger? Of course not.Probably a better idea to go by HD.
A CR 20 dragon is > 20 level character. By leaps.
Depends on the stat adjustments. A gnoll has two humanoid HD, +4 str, +2 con, -2 int and cha. Frankly, just awful. Even ignoring the racial HD you have an underpowered race by comparison. Now, bugbear however is +6 str, +2 dex and con, +3 nat armor all for -2 cha and 3 racial HD. This puts the bugbear on par with a barbarian, but once you start getting into giants and outsiders the abilities far exceed class abilities.
As has been said, it needs to be eyeballed. The monster PC rules for PF are worse than 3.5's because it forces the DM to make up his or her own mind without a guideline that works.
Use your own judgement and pray for reasonable players that don't abuse the rules like a red headed step child.
If the CR of the creature is 3, then it's a valid monster to be played as a PC as long as the other characters are 3rd level.Characters of level 3 are CR 2.
Small distinction, PC's are CR3 because they use the PC WBL chart and typically have more gear than the standard npc. A 3rd level npc is cr2, but give him gear equal to a pc and he's cr3. There's your difference. So a CR3 creature with standard gear will be equal to a 3rd level PC with his standard WBL gear equivalent.
As has been said, it needs to be eyeballed. The monster PC rules for PF are worse than 3.5's because it forces the DM to make up his or her own mind without a guideline that works.
There's really no distinction, 3.5's level adjustments were pretty bad at times. Eyeballing has always been more of the standard then just going by whatever the book says in my experience.
That's actually an absolutely AWFUL idea. Sorry. Most racial hit dice levels are inferior even to NPC levels. Would you consider someone with 3 levels of commoner and two levels of Ranger to be equal to a 5th level ranger? Of course not.Probably a better idea to go by HD.
A CR 20 dragon is > 20 level character. By leaps.
Commoner is an NPC class. Dragon is a monster.
I'm not being snarky here, but that was an apples n oranges deal.
I FAQ'd this because it comes up all the time.
My take on it is this:
Pathfinder RPG has no level equivalency rules for things that are not player races. There is no exchange rate in the system, because the rules are not designed to handle Monstrous PCs.
On the other hand, there is a guideline included for GMs who want to be permissive about MPCs. These are left deliberately loose so that players don't feel entitled to play MPCs. For an example on how a clearly-defined GM rule can engender a sense of player entitlement, see Prestige Classes.
There are 3.5 rules that standardize an exchange rate. They still exist, and with moderate effort, a GM could use them to allow MPCs instead of the Pathfinder guideline. Say what you what about back-compatibility, this was the intention — people could keep the 3.5 products they liked and use them in their own games.
I suggest first trying out the Bestiary guidelines. If you find that you preferred the 3.5 approach, switch back to that. If you are a player, and not a GM, do what the GM asks of you, or run your own game.
|
Rite Publishing has specific monster race/classes, including minotaurs and gargoyles which allow you to begin playing the races at level 1. More in this line is planned for this coming year. Those interested in monstrous races are highly encouraged to check out the line.
Regarding the other discussion, a commoner 3/Ranger 2 would be about a CR 3 imo. The rule of thumb is you subtract 2 from Class Level to get CR when dealing with NPC classes and you subtract 1 from Class Level to get CR when dealing with PC classes. If you throw a level 5 human fighter at your party as an opponent, it would generally be a CR 4 encounter, not a CR 5 encounter.
Racial HD are really only >= to PC class HD in a couple of areas (Outsider and Dragon being the primary ones). In almost all other cases going with racial HD instead of a PC class is a bad trade-off unless you can get a ton of supernatural or spell-like abilities.
|
|
Racial HD are really only >= to PC class HD in a couple of areas (Outsider and Dragon being the primary ones). In almost all other cases going with racial HD instead of a PC class is a bad trade-off unless you can get a ton of supernatural or spell-like abilities.
There's a chart on page 291 of the Bestiary which gives the approximate number of racial HD a particular CR should have. It is not a 1 to 1 trade-off for any creature type. Most 1 HD monsters are actually a CR 1/2 or 1/3. Most CR 1 creatures have 2 HD. By the time you are up to CR 7 you will generally have 10 racial HD. Conversely, a CR 7 creature with class levels only will have about 8 PC class levels.
That's actually an absolutely AWFUL idea. Sorry. Most racial hit dice levels are inferior even to NPC levels. Would you consider someone with 3 levels of commoner and two levels of Ranger to be equal to a 5th level ranger? Of course not.Probably a better idea to go by HD.
A CR 20 dragon is > 20 level character. By leaps.Commoner is an NPC class. Dragon is a monster.
I'm not being snarky here, but that was an apples n oranges deal.
So was the original comment, no offense intended. You're picking a dragon, CR 20, and taking that as the reason to use HD. However, if you look at anything CR <= 5, then using HD is AWFUL (sorry, not being snarky, just trying to make the point).
The reason the suggestion to use the CR and ignore the HD is that the HD are a minor contribution to the total CR. The stats and abilities make up 80% of the CR.
I don't think the CR works at all levels, but it works well for anything that is reasonable to be played by as a PC. That means things CR 5 or less honestly.
Remember, racial HD are not maxed at first level, just rolled, so if the character has 3d6 or 3d8 hp at 4th level, that's not 6+2d6 or 8+2d8.
EDIT: As an example, take a Noble Drow. By using HD, you're saying a Noble Drow is perfectly fine as a 1st level PC, because it has no HD.
I thought he was asking about players using monsters as PCs, and how to try to balance the 2.
I've played in a gme where the DM wanted us to make level 20 characters. I asked if I could play a CR 19 bronze dragon with 1 level of paladin. He agreed. I was way more powerful than any other PC.
I should have played a 20 HD dragon instead, or closest to it with out going over. Would have been a better fit for balance. This is where I'm coming from.
If the disparity isn't the same at lower levels then it won't matter.
|
|
If you are looking to use low level (previously LA +1) races I think the suggestions in the first book in Council of Thieves is the best advice I've seen. Have the player with the advanced race start at the same level as the PCs but give the other players a boon. The boon can be a bonus feat, or possibly allow them to start the game with a more treasure.
The big problem with +LA creatures is that when they are first introduced they are more typically slightly more powerful than the PCs then as the PCs progress the +LA creatures fall behind and get further and further behind as the game progresses. Under 3.5 a +2 LA drow with three levels of wizard was nearly worthless to a 5th level party.
If you want to play a monster race there are some solid third party products like those from Rite Publishing (Wicht linked above) that have full progression monster classes.
|
If you are looking to use low level (previously LA +1) races I think the suggestions in the first book in Council of Thieves is the best advice I've seen. Have the player with the advanced race start at the same level as the PCs but give the other players a boon. The boon can be a bonus feat, or possibly allow them to start the game with a more treasure.
The big problem with +LA creatures is that when they are first introduced they are more typically slightly more powerful than the PCs then as the PCs progress the +LA creatures fall behind and get further and further behind as the game progresses. Under 3.5 a +2 LA drow with three levels of wizard was nearly worthless to a 5th level party.
If you want to play a monster race there are some solid third party products like those from Rite Publishing (Wicht linked above) that have full progression monster classes.
That's exactly what the +LA problem was all about. When you start off, the +LA races are powerful compared to regular races. Yet as the levels progress, the abilities that warrant the +LA become less and less powerful.
Drow are a great example. When you kick off the game, the SR and SLAs seem like a sweet deal, sure. But when you reach higher levels, SR becomes more a liability (since you have to lower it to allow friendly spells) than a boon, being able to plink darkness once per day matters little when everybody is running around with true seeing, on, and for all that trouble you are two levels behind everybody else. And being two levels behind is borderline crippling.
check out the bestiary. Most non standard races that have pc levels will be at cr 1/2 and those with ncp level are at cr 1/3. There are some exceptions like the kobold and the bugbear though most follow the rules nicely.
Right, it follows exactly what I'm saying. A 1st level (Human) fighter is CR 1/2, cause that's CR1 -1. A 1st level warrior is 1/3 cause that's CR 1/2 -1. Those examples mean the Level adjustment for those creatures is pretty much 0. The svirfneblin was one of the few races in the Bestiary that didnt follow this pattern and they have arguably better abilities than the others.
As for gear, I don't see much different. A character that we would make might have slightly better gear though not to the extend that it justifies a cr adjustment.
I cant find it in the book (someone care to help me out here), consider that the WBL for a 5th level PC is 10,500gp (total) and the NPC gear allotment is 2400gp (total) and I'm sure that you can see why a PC is considered 1 CR higher due to gear.
Im looking through the template lsit but none of the templates seem to have any level adjustment rules for PCs?
As everyone has explained: You use CR not LA+ HD for ECL in Pathfinder.
Right, it follows exactly what I'm saying. A 1st level (Human) fighter is CR 1/2, cause that's CR1 -1. A 1st level warrior is 1/3 cause that's CR 1/2 -1. Those examples mean the Level adjustment for those creatures is pretty much 0. The svirfneblin was one of the few races in the Bestiary that didnt follow this pattern and they have arguably better abilities than the others.It's not what you are saying. You said that a 3th level ncp (with ncp levels) is cr 2, while it is cr 1.
Let me clarify, Npc's with levels in PC classes are CR-1, I did say npc's but did not mean npc classes, my mistake. Adding NPC class levels (warrior, commoner, etc.) count as a 1 CR per 2 levels taken.
If you dont see how 8100gp could improve the difficulty of a 5th level npc encounter then I think you're probably being intentionally obtuse on the matter.
Honestly the presence of a more powerful racial option can generally be balanced by giving additional traits to the "regular" races.
The plane-touched races such as Tieflings are probably worth a +1 trait to the other classes. Races like Hobgoblin are probably in the same boat.
Noble Drow would probably be worth +2 traits.
For medium sized humanoids with racial HD like Gnolls and Bugbears it's probably worth going with their CR so a Gnoll Barbarian 1 is the equivalent of a second level character. Bugbear Ranger 1 is the equivalent of a third level character.
I let them start at those stats along side the other PCs but they actually don't gain additional levels until their XP equals their effective character level. Further their effective character level does modify the APL so they are likely to face tougher foes early on than they would if all regular humanoids.
I strongly discourage the incorporation of large+ humanoids like Ogres or Centaurs as they generally have stats way in excess of the regular races and pose a lot of challenges. Non humanoid monsters are pretty much a no go for me.
I also avoid going much above 3 racial HD as the trade-off just isn't worth it and they tend to overshadow other characters early on.
Since each monster is not made with PC use in mind there can be no across the board rule(s) that generate MPC's. Each monster must be taken and adjusted individually. Wizards tried this with Savage Species and failed spectacularly. That book proved that a little playtesting would've gone a long ways.
Unless we can determine what a class ability is worth compared to a stat adjustment MPC's will always be difficult to gauge.
Pathfinder does not make use of level-adjusted templates.
But how will players create their albino half-drow/half-dragon tiefling death clerics?
@ the argument about NPC CRs above
Adding NPCs: Creatures whose Hit Dice are solely a factor of their class levels and not a feature of their race, such as all of the PC races detailed in Chapter 2, are factored into combats a little differently than a normal monster or monsters with class levels. A creature that possesses class levels, but does not have any racial Hit Dice, is factored in as a creature with a CR equal to its class levels -1. A creature that only possesses non-player class levels (such as a warrior or adept-see page 448) is factored in as a creature with a CR equal to its class levels -2. If this reduction would reduce a creature's CR to below 1, its CR drops one step on the following progression for each step below 1 this reduction would make: 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, 1/6, 1/8.
Seems pretty cut-and-dried right? Well, read further down the page:
NPC Gear Adjustments: You can signifigantly increase or decrease the power level of an NPC with class levels adjusting the NPC's gear. The combined value of an NPC's gear is given in Chapter 14 on Table 14-9. A classed NPC encountered with no gear should have his CR reduced by 1 (provided that the loss of gear actually hampers the NPC), while a classed NPC that instead has gear equivalent to that of a PC (as listed on Table 12-4) has a CR 1 higher than his actual CR. Be careful awarding NPCs this gear, though-especially at high levels, where you can blow out your entire adventure's treasure budget in one fell swoop!
So, by taking both of the sentences I bolded into account: a creature with class levels, no racial hit dice, and gear equal to the WBL chart is of a CR equal to its class levels. That sounds a lot like PCs to me.
Im looking through the template lsit but none of the templates seem to have any level adjustment rules for PCs?As everyone has explained: You use CR not LA+ HD for ECL in Pathfinder.
...except for cohorts, which have their own wonky table.
|
As others have pointed out, there are no offical level adjustment rules currently in the Pathfinder RPG. Paizo has suggested a few good optional ways to handle this if you need to (some of which have been mentioned here)
I should mention that Learning Curve - Apprentice Level Characters from Tricky Owlbear Publishing gives an optional way of using the apprentice level rules presented to balance out these types of races. It's not the main thrust of the product certainly (that would be giving rules for PCs to start as multi class characters right from first level) BUT those optional suggestions for using these rules to balance such races are in there as well.
Check it out (hey, the price is pretty hard to beat ;)
NPC Gear Adjustments: You can signifigantly increase or decrease the power level of an NPC with class levels adjusting the NPC's gear. The combined value of an NPC's gear is given in Chapter 14 on Table 14-9. A classed NPC encountered with no gear should have his CR reduced by 1 (provided that the loss of gear actually hampers the NPC), while a classed NPC that instead has gear equivalent to that of a PC (as listed on Table 12-4) has a CR 1 higher than his actual CR. Be careful awarding NPCs this gear, though-especially at high levels, where you can blow out your entire adventure's treasure budget in one fell swoop!So, by taking both of the sentences I bolded into account: a creature with class levels, no racial hit dice, and gear equal to the WBL chart is of a CR equal to its class levels. That sounds a lot like PCs to me.
That's exactly the paragraph I was remembering, thanks for the paste.