Talk:Changeling (3.5e Race)

From Dungeons and Dragons Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Increased Con Penalty?[edit]

Aarnott, Foxwarrior and I have discussed the possibility of making the Constitution penalty for changelings -4 instead of the current -2. Because of the ability for this race to have something as potentially strong as a floating bonus feat (for imitating a human) and then have the ability to invest in another feat to make up for at least a -2 Con penalty, it seems like a reasonable suggestion. That having been said, the ramifications of a -4 penalty to any ability score, but particularly one as near-universally necessary as Constitution, are pretty far-reaching, so I'm torn on the matter and have decided to put it here on an open forum for discussion.

On a similar note, I am thinking about removing the chameleon's ability to morph if they are undead. I think rationalizing it from a flavor standpoint is easy enough (like being dead makes their body unable to adapt/transform or whatever), and it makes it so there isn't an easy loophole to exploit and get around the Con penalty. By the same token, they should probably not be able to transform into non-living creatures, which is an easy enough change in itself. - TG Cid 21:32, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

-4 is rough, but I don't have a solution for you. Instead, a suggestion... say "ECL" instead of "LA" 0. Otherwise you might be able to turn into a LA 0 thing with racial HD. -- Eiji-kun 23:05, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
I see your point, although I had usually thought of ECL 1 being the equivalent of LA +0. In the wake of that, I have changed it to ECL 1 for the time being. Feel free to correct if that is a a mistake. - TG Cid 23:17, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
ECL 1 is only equivalent to LA +0 when the race grants 0 or 1 racial hit dice. And 1 is only in there because it is specifically dropped and replaced with a class hit die. But if a race grants 6 racial hit die, it could be an ECL 6 if it has LA +0, or an ECL 15 if it has LA +9. So going ECL here is probably a better call. - Tarkisflux Talk 23:36, 5 April 2012 (UTC)