Does the Rakshasa have a too-high CR?

[pawsplay]

Well, in the Hindu myths they are unpredictable, random cannibals, who sometimes didn't have the sense to hide their weird hands. If you wanted to harken back to their origins, they should be NE, maybe CE.

I think CR 9 is absolutely fine for their abilities. They are tougher than some other creatures that are tougher than a straight up CR 7 sorcerer. However, like most casters, they are vulnerable to being outnumbered. In addition to their spellcasting, they do have +17 to Bluff. And relative to a sorcerer of their level, their DCs are going to be very hard hitting (standard elite scores would allow a raksasha to have a Cha of 21 as 1st level sorcerer, then immediately take a Cha increase for a 22). So even as a 8th level caster, their spells have a DC of up to 20, compared to a Cha 17 human sorcerer at level 10, whose 5th level spells would have a DC of 18.

Actually, I think CR 10 is fine, looking at that. But I think I would put them at 9.

 

[Nifft]

I had some excellent evil fun throwing a Rak / Ftr 4 at my PCs. He was a flying tripping chainfighter, and his spell list was optimized for one-on-one combat, as were his feats and equipment.

He wasn't really a CR 14, though. Perhaps next one will be a Knight Phantom.

-- N

 

[Warbringer]

The spell selection makes this rak particulary weak, but I agree that CR 10 is too high. Weak 9/Strong 8.


Alos, need to equip appropriately to reflect is effective "level". AC is way too low, when you think what a 7th+ spellcaster should have access to. Consider, ground zero fireballs from a wand, not going to touch his SR... Dump the Bear's, Suggestion looking at Orb spells instead, he becomes a bit of a powerhouse, especially if you allow a metarod.

As you pointed out, make sure it has fighting minions, especially with 7 charms a day! and DMGII mob rules

Now, for CR10, I'd take a 7th level Sorcerer/Doppleganger in a heartbeat.

 

[pawsplay]

I had some excellent evil fun throwing a Rak / Ftr 4 at my PCs. He was a flying tripping chainfighter, and his spell list was optimized for one-on-one combat, as were his feats and equipment.

He wasn't really a CR 14, though. Perhaps next one will be a Knight Phantom.

-- N

By the RAW, that should have been CR 12. 10 + four nonassociated class levels.

 

[Cadfan]

"Nonassociated" is a judgment call on the DM's part when dealing with monsters.

 

[NilesB]

I've long wanted D&D to have Rakasha closer to the source material.

They're one of the precious few races of nonhuman mook hordes in myth.

 

[Nifft]

Good point on the non-associated. Hadn't really thought about that -- full BAB Outsider and all -- but the spellcasting non-advancement did kinda suck. Thus, Eldrich Knight being an excellent class for Raks, and likewise Knight Phantom (and Spellsword, Dragonslayer, etc.).

For Dopplegangers, since they're skill-ish with full BAB and Rogue synergy, wouldn't Sorcerer be non-associated? So, you could have a Doppleganger Sorc 9 and still be CR 10?

Cheers, -- N

 

[pawsplay]

"Nonassociated" is a judgment call on the DM's part when dealing with monsters.

Right, but they cast as sorcerers and it specifically describes them as disdaining melee combat. I think as melee combatants they are far less formidable than as buffed up sorcerers.

 

[pawsplay]

Good point on the non-associated. Hadn't really thought about that -- full BAB Outsider and all -- but the spellcasting non-advancement did kinda suck. Thus, Eldrich Knight being an excellent class for Raks, and likewise Knight Phantom (and Spellsword, Dragonslayer, etc.).

For Dopplegangers, since they're skill-ish with full BAB and Rogue synergy, wouldn't Sorcerer be non-associated? So, you could have a Doppleganger Sorc 9 and still be CR 10?

Cheers, -- N

That one's a really tough call. On the one hand, they are more rogue-oriented, and spells don't add directly to their abilities, and they have 4 HD. On the other hand, they have +2 Cha and a Cha based detect thoughts. I'd say that with Spell Focus and Practiced Caster, sorcerer would still be associated.

 

[Nifft]

They're both tough calls, IMHO.

-- N