Anyways, I noticed that there is no special vision properties for them in the ToA preview. It seems to me that they should have either low-light or darkvision 60'. What does everyone else think?
Also, the level adjustment for Tarek seems high at +2. It seems to me that +1 fits in better with its general threat level. Any thoughts?
Anyways, I noticed that there is no special vision properties for them in the ToA preview. It seems to me that they should have either low-light or darkvision 60'. What does everyone else think?
Nikaal are humanoids with the reptilian subtype, as opposed to monstrous humanoids, and so have no special vision due to their type. This also matches the nikaals as they were presented in 2e, where they only had normal vision.
Also, the level adjustment for Tarek seems high at +2. It seems to me that +1 fits in better with its general threat level. Any thoughts?
Firstly, LA doesn't measure threat level - that's CR. LA measures the creature's relevant long-term power as a player race. Given that consideration, Tareks (also humanoids as opposed to monstrous humanoids) have the following elements that are considered when calculating their level adjustment:
Unabalanced ability scores (+4 total above the norm)
Darkvision
Weapon familiarity with two weapons
Bonus feat
Ferocity (comparable to the Diehard feat, which comes with its own prerequisites)
Natural armor
Intimidate bonus
Musk penalty
Natural weapons
Some of these are acceptable as bonuses for a LA+0 race, but others clearly push into the realm of LA+1. If you then compare the tarek to other LA+1 creatures, you'll see that the tarek is slightly better. It might not be as powerful as some with LA+2, but it's definitely ahead of the pack in LA+1. General design philosophy advises that you put it in the upper end of the scale in such cases (mainly to encourage players to choose more standard creatures, an approach I don't 100% agree with, but that's the way D&D does things).
For comparison, take a look at the aasimar. It has several of the same bonuses (+4 ability scores, darkvision, skill bonuses) as well as daylight SLA and 3 minor resistances. If you equate the SLA and the resistances to, say the bonus feat and ferocity, you are still left with natural armor and weapons and weapon familiarity with 2 exotic weapons to account for. While the musk penalties offset this to a small degree, I don't think that they account for a whole level. Hence the tarek gets LA+2 instead of LA+1
.Unabalanced ability scores (+4 total above the norm)
Darkvision
Weapon familiarity with two weapons
Bonus feat
Ferocity (comparable to the Diehard feat, which comes with its own prerequisites)
Natural armor
Intimidate bonus
Musk penalty
Natural weapons
Tareks:
Str +4, Con +4, Int -2, Wis -4, Cha -2, Net enhancement +0.
Darkvision is only to 30'.
Musk provides -12 total skill ranks with Intimidate +4. net of -8 skill ranks.
Weapon familiarity with two weapons.
Ferocity and Teamwork
Natural Attack
Natural Armor
Bonus languages: None
Aasimar
+2 Wisdom, +2 Charisma. Net +4
Darkvision 60'
+2 racial bonus on Spot and Listen checks. Net +4
SA: Daylight.
SQ: Resistance to acid 5, cold 5, and electricity 5.
6 Bonus Languages
I figure that the natural armor cancels out one of the resistances and the ferocity, teamwork, 30' darkvision cancel out the 60' darkvision and last two resistances. The +4 net skill bonus cancels out the intimidate bonus. Daylight cancels slam. The six bonus languages cancel out the 2 weapon familiarities.
This still leaves Aasimar with +4 ability and Tarek with -12 skills. It seems to me they should only be +1.
Str +4, Con +4, Int -2, Wis -4, Cha -2, Net enhancement +0.
Mental stats count for half the value of physical stats when doing these kind of comparisons. There is therefore a +4 bonus unnacounted for at the end of the day.
I figure that the natural armor cancels out one of the resistances and the ferocity, teamwork, 30' darkvision cancel out the 60' darkvision and last two resistances. The +4 net skill bonus cancels out the intimidate bonus. Daylight cancels slam. The six bonus languages cancel out the 2 weapon familiarities.
This still leaves Aasimar with +4 ability and Tarek with -12 skills. It seems to me they should only be +1.
Natural armor is more useful over the long term than minor resistances that only apply in specific instances. The same applies to ferocity and teamwork - these are general, far-reaching bonuses that apply in all combat situations. I agree that the skill bonuses are equivalent but I cannot agree that a weak SLA like daylight compares at all to a natural weapon, nor that languages (no matter how many you have) equate to weapon familiarity with two exotic weapons. It is these long-term considerations that inform the choice as to what a creature's level adjustment is. And, as I mentioned before, there is also the consideration that 3e design philosophy requires you to err on the higher side. This ensures that supposedly rare races (like tareks) are actually rare in play. If they were just as good choices as standard player races (like muls), everyone would choose them instead of the standard races. Also, a higher LA is easier to adjust in play than a lower one, should you decide that you have miscalculated. If you have set the LA too high, you can lower it with ease and compensate by giving the character an extra level in a class. If you have set it too low, it is harder to penalise a character further down the line by increasing it during play. Most players resist this kind of tweaking and so it is best to avoid it.
Mental stats count for half the value of physical stats when doing these kind of comparisons. There is therefore a +4 bonus unnacounted for at the end of the day.
This seems pretty lame to me. Just a criticism of the rule itself. It seems to me that the mental attributes are just as important if not more so than the physicial. A -4 to wisdom is a -2 to Will saves in a world dominated by psionics, ouch. It also limits those Tarek Earth clerics and psychic warriors to a fair degree. The hit to intelligence costs skill points. Charisma might be a little less useful except for turning undead and and wilder manifestation, though since the musk penalty already hits their Cha-based skills this is significant as well. So if the tarek just wants to roam the deserts beating things down with other tareks, it seems an advantage. Otherwise it appears to me that it balances out.
Their natural attack is pretty lame in and of itself: Slam (1d4) no claws or bites. Weapon familiarity only helps if they choose a class which has martial proficiency, and even so, the chances of finding an exotic weapon that bears an enchantment is probably going to be about nil. Their Darkvision is only 30'. Ferocity and Teamwork are nice, but the net -8 on skills would require two feats to compensate (many feats give a +2 to to skills , for a net +4 bonus for a given feat). The natural AC seems like a great benefit at low levels, but at higher levels I wouldn't think that it would be as useful.
This seems pretty lame to me. Just a criticism of the rule itself. It seems to me that the mental attributes are just as important if not more so than the physicial. A -4 to wisdom is a -2 to Will saves in a world dominated by psionics, ouch. It also limits those Tarek Earth clerics and psychic warriors to a fair degree. The hit to intelligence costs skill points. Charisma might be a little less useful except for turning undead and and wilder manifestation, though since the musk penalty already hits their Cha-based skills this is significant as well. So if the tarek just wants to roam the deserts beating things down with other tareks, it seems an advantage. Otherwise it appears to me that it balances out.
That's the way it works. Some races are better suited to certain classes.
Their natural attack is pretty lame in and of itself: Slam (1d4) no claws or bites.
Why is a slam that does 1d4+Str necessarily worse than a claw or a bite that does 1d4+Str? Damage type is not a factor for level adjustments
Weapon familiarity only helps if they choose a class which has martial proficiency, and even so, the chances of finding an exotic weapon that bears an enchantment is probably going to be about nil.
That's the same with any race that has weapon familiarity. As I noted above, some races are better suited to certain classes. That's how D&D has been put together since day one. Also, the presence of magic items (or lack thereof) is not a factor for level adjustments. It's something for the DM to consider in adventure design once the party composition is established.
Their Darkvision is only 30'. Ferocity and Teamwork are nice, but the net -8 on skills would require two feats to compensate (many feats give a +2 to to skills , for a net +4 bonus for a given feat). The natural AC seems like a great benefit at low levels, but at higher levels I wouldn't think that it would be as useful.
Ferocity and Teamwork are more than just "nice". Ferocity in particular. As for AC being more significant at higher levels, that's a truism that applies to all armor. In general, high level monster BABs outstrip character AC sooner or later anyway. That is no reason to reduce the level adjustment for starting or low-level characters, which is where these things come primarily into play. Yes, the musk offsets things to a degree, but it's penalty is of less relevance to the kind of martial classes that the tarek favours.
At the end of the day, the tarek is a more powerful character race than other LA+1 races by a notch or two. It might not be in the same league as all LA+2 races, but in these cases designers are wise to err on the high side. It's a basic design consideration when working on non-standard races.
In a more freewheeling game, with a mix of monstrous races combined with core races, you would probably have little trouble with making the tarek LA+1 (although I'm not sure that people playing muls would agree with the decision). For a core DS game, though, the tarek stands at LA+2. If it really doesn't sit well with you, then change it
.