Okay .... So an Eldritch Giant Confessor is only a CR 20??

[Bagpuss]

Looking it, my thought was, "How is cleric non-associated for a strong melee character with a Wis bonus?"

The same way sorcerer (and wizard even though it's there preferred class) is non-associated for a Mind-flayer....

 

[Cyronax]

Good discussion. I didn't even know the thread was still active after the first reply.

Anyway, something exceedingly nasty, but allowable if one were to toy with the EldGiant's initial skill and feat selection would be to give him a full 10 levels of Ur-priest.

That sort of villain would then have access to all sorts of new options and still have the same CR (and one less HD than the Confessor no less).

After having it explained to me, the non-associated class CR rule makes sense, but some monsters seem to benefit from a great deal of classes. An EldGiant's associated classes are what?

Sorcerer and Wizard caster levels don't stack with the EldGiant's Spell-likes, nor would rogue or bard be feasible. Fighter and barbarian would be associated, but the best class that I'd want as an EldGiant would be a cleric or cleric-like class. It plays to many of his strengths as it is -- especially a continued expertise with combat, healing magic (and don't forget that he could use high level disposable scrolls to get power over his 11 levels of cleric.) All in all, I think the Confessor (and especially an Ur-priest) are tough if played right.

As a note, I have not DMed or played in a campaign that has gone past 12th level. So much of this is predictive analysis.

Thanks,
C.I.D.

 

[Justin Cray]

Well the choice to associate a class or not is entirely dependable on the level of optimization imho. A Giant level 11 cleric based on buffs really isn't that strong at that CR. But if you focus on disabling spells, movement and blasts it suddenly becomes more able because of the high DCs.

How can you measure this optimization though? It's not like you have the time to analyze every encounter for the tactics of each player compared to the likely tactics of the opposition.

 

[Nail]

How can you measure this optimization though? It's not like you have the time to analyze every encounter for the tactics of each player compared to the likely tactics of the opposition.

It's an art....and an educated guess.

At high level, our party easily destroyed the opposition in published adventures. Just rolled over 'em. Yet when customized bad guys came our way (home-brew, etc), we would often have trouble with CR = APL, especially at high level.

<shrug>

 

[Rystil Arden]

It's an art....and an educated guess.

At high level, our party easily destroyed the opposition in published adventures. Just rolled over 'em. Yet when customized bad guys came our way (home-brew, etc), we would often have trouble with CR = APL, especially at high level.

<shrug>

Yup. The effect exists at low level that every party is different, but the resulting differences are linear with party level, such that the differences for low-level parties are usually negligible enough that the true CR is about the same for most groups (except in extreme cases, CR usually varies at most by half the party level based on party interdynamics, and a + or - 1 CR at level 2 probably won't kill anyone...probably). But at high level, when things can vary by up to 10 CR based on situationals according to my rule of thumb (10 may seem extreme, but I have seen it, and in extreme cases, I have seen even more than 10 in variation), the results can ruin the game (either in anticlimax or TPK) if you don't playtest it.

So I urge every GM of high level games: PLAYTEST YOUR ENCOUNTERS FIRST! GMs who don't playtest their creations or who buy adventures for high levels and play them out of the box without playtest are the ones giving the d20 system a bad rep for "breaking at high levels". It doesn't break at high levels, but the CR system becomes much less safe as a benchmark and educated guess.

 

[pawsplay]

The same way sorcerer (and wizard even though it's there preferred class) is non-associated for a Mind-flayer....

The mind flayer sorcerer in the MM treats it as a favored class.

 

[Nail]

So I urge every GM of high level games: PLAYTEST YOUR ENCOUNTERS FIRST! ....

...and it doesn't take much. Usually (for me) just the first round of a playtest is plenty. Just use the typical tactics of the PCs and "monster".

 

[Gort]

The mind flayer sorcerer in the MM treats (sorcerer) as a favored class.

And it's an exceedingly weak monster for its CR. Sorcerer levels barely improve the mind flayer at all - the only thing I can think of that synergises is the fact that the mind blast is based on charisma. If you're going to use a mind flayer, get a psionics book and do it correctly, or make a sorcerer and give it the mind flayer description and a themed spell list.

 

[pawsplay]

And it's an exceedingly weak monster for its CR. Sorcerer levels barely improve the mind flayer at all - the only thing I can think of that synergises is the fact that the mind blast is based on charisma. If you're going to use a mind flayer, get a psionics book and do it correctly, or make a sorcerer and give it the mind flayer description and a themed spell list.

It has a hugemongous Cha bonus, and is strong in melee. Not bad for a... sorcerer.

I ran one as a boss monster in my game. It was devastatingly effective.