Revised CRs/ECLs continuation thread

[Upper_Krust]

Just to tidy all this up...

Hi all!

Since you all seem to be close to openly insulting each other over this latest debacle; and since I'm the only one here with a wisdom of 18 or better lets see if we can't isolate the disagreement...

1) Low level characters ARE more fragile because they are more vulnerable to less powerful opponents than characters of other levels.

2) The current system is about as accurate as you will get without breaking down CR into units smaller than 1.

However, it could easily better utilise the EL units of 1.

Obviously there are discrepancies between monsters of the same CR using single increments.

eg. A kobold is not as powerful as a 1st-level NPC.

The differences can be sorted within EL I believe though.

Certainly, factional CR should be tied to EL. In that CR 1/2 should be 2 points of EL less than CR 1. Since it represents the fact that two CR 1/2 creatures equal one CR 1, and as we know an increase of +2 EL is the same as doubling the number of opponents.

So if CR 1 = EL 1
CR 2/3 = EL 0
CR 1/2 = EL -1
CR 1/3 = EL -2
CR 1/4 or 1/5 = EL -3
CR 1/6 or 1/7 = EL -4
CR 1/8 to 1/11 = EL -5
CR 1/12 to 1/15 = EL -6
CR 1/16 to CR 1/23 = EL -7

The difficulty becomes assigning CR scores below 1. Although I think we arrived at an acceptable method above I am still not convinced it is perfect so I will do some more research on the matter.

I know Eldorian mentioned that the CR factors may not be accurate enough when delving into fractions but I think it will be more accurate than if we do not.

Any comments?

 

[Upper_Krust]

Can't leave you children alone for two minutes...

You are so funny. Where is this proof you keep talking about? I love it. You consistently defer to Upper_Krust's calculations, and throw around the word "mathematical" like it's going out of style ... but with no substance. Well, here's your chance to prove yourself Anubis. Upper_Krust's computer is down for the count. Step up to bat. What is this highly lauded mathematical proof you get so much mileage out of without ever once delivering first hand? Ante up.

Right now, the fractional system at lower levels keeps 4 goblins where they belong (at the EL 2 level) and accurately addresses the "fodder" to "nemesis" issue I keep bringing up. Do you even know what I mean by that? Every one of your posts indicates a resounding "no". It helps to know what is being talked about before opening your mouth on the subject. Heck, you just figured out how the fractional system is supposed to work!

I could be the only person with a problem here and it still wouldn't change my conviction. So far the only other person embracing my revelation (well, besides Upper_Krust) has been the one logical voice of reason. Just because a stadium full of people screams that 1+1=3 doesn't make them right. I prefer to think outside of that stadium. Feel free to remain inside.



Your voice carries no more authority now than, well ... ever. In fact it carries even less.

Can we please, please stop with the personal attacks.

Suffice to say I am back and I will start kicking @ss if people don't start showing each other the same respect they would show me.

...and in this I am specifically looking at Anubis, Eldorian and Sonofapreacherman.

Its really lowering the whole tone of the thread - and thereby reflects badly on me specifically.

Also you guys are probably disaffecting posters who would otherwise contribute but for the constant sniping going on.

Its clear the three of you all have something to add, and are passionate about the material, but you just seem incapable of keeping the debate friendly.

Most disheartening.

 

[Anubis]

You are so funny. Where is this proof you keep talking about? I love it. You consistently defer to Upper_Krust's calculations, and throw around the word "mathematical" like it's going out of style ... but with no substance. Well, here's your chance to prove yourself Anubis. Upper_Krust's computer is down for the count. Step up to bat. What is this highly lauded mathematical proof you get so much mileage out of without ever once delivering first hand? Ante up.

You're asking me to explain an explanation? You really do just look for argument, don't you? The system IS the explanation, and therefore needs none. You do not explanation reasoning. They are one in the same.

If I must, however, I suppose I can explain even further. When a creature or creatures is of an EL that is equal to four characters of that level (e.g. EL 1 against four Level 1 characters), that EL represents a mild encounter for that party. By the book, this gives us an encounter that should use about 20% of the PCs resources. Because of this, one opponent of that EL is equal to any of the PCs of the same EL (e.g. an EL 1 is equal to a Level 1 PC), and as such, a 50/50 encounter in a on-on-one fight. By the math, that means that four opponents of that EL are a 50/50 challenge for four such PCs. A 50/50 encounter is one that is EL +4 when compared to the PCs, and as such, four opponents of a like EL are EL +4. Using this, we can extrapolate every single number there is. Two opponents are EL +2, three are EL +3, etc. This is the explanation as to where the numbers for multiple opponents in the system come from. To extrapolate even further, we reverse engineer these numbers to find the PEL for various party sizes. Again, this gives us the results in the system itself.

There you have your proof.

Now if you would like proof that a goblin is CR 1/2 and four goblins are EL 3, well, the only such proof possible is called playtesting. If an EL +4 is a 50/50 encounter and an EL +0 is a 20% encounter, that puts an EL +2 right in between the two. If you playtest three goblins correctly (by the book, by their stats, and without holding back or fudging any dice rolls) and against a standard party as per the rules, you will find the goblins to be far worse than 20% but not quite a 50/50 encounter. There is that proof.

Right now, the fractional system at lower levels keeps 4 goblins where they belong (at the EL 2 level)

How so? The fractional system YOU refer to that actually creates a CR 2/3 puts four goblins back up to EL 4, because goblins are CR 0.800 and as such become a CR 2/3 creature. If that is not the fractional system you refer to, then you are obviously talking about the other thing I said where goblins are counted as CR 1/2, but even then, four goblins are STILL EL 3.

and accurately addresses the "fodder" to "nemesis" issue I keep bringing up.

How so? Now you're gone beyond this debate. If you're talking about fractional CRs ABOVE 1, that does not cover goblins no matter how you look at it. Other than that, there IS NO "fodder to nesesis issue". You alone having such an issue does not make it an issue.

Do you even know what I mean by that? Every one of your posts indicates a resounding "no". It helps to know what is being talked about before opening your mouth on the subject. Heck, you just figured out how the fractional system is supposed to work!

I could be the only person with a problem here and it still wouldn't change my conviction. So far the only other person embracing my revelation (well, besides Upper_Krust)

You're overlooking the fact that he hasn't agreed with you. He has proposed MORE fractions, but he still translates everything to straight number ELs in the negatives, which is pedantic to say the least.

has been the one logical voice of reason. Just because a stadium full of people screams that 1+1=3 doesn't make them right. I prefer to think outside of that stadium. Feel free to remain inside.

Well, considering the FACT that playtesting, which is the single most important and decisive factor of the system, bears the CURRENT system to be accurate, that makes you wrong by default. It's not my fault if you don't DM right, and the system should not have to take that into account.

Your voice carries no more authority now than, well ... ever. In fact it carries even less.

More than yours does, man. More than yours does.

Hi all!

Since you all seem to be close to openly insulting each other over this latest debacle; and since I'm the only one here with a wisdom of 18 or better lets see if we can't isolate the disagreement...

1) Low level characters ARE more fragile because they are more vulnerable to less powerful opponents than characters of other levels.

2) The current system is about as accurate as you will get without breaking down CR into units smaller than 1.

We have fractions. All I think is necessary is to count fractions as fractions and not negative ELs.

However, it could easily better utilise the EL units of 1.

Obviously there are discrepancies between monsters of the same CR using single increments.

You're starting to let the two lone doubters get to you here. Of course there are differences! What you are forgetting is that there are always differences as no two creatures can ever be truly equal. What matters is that the differences don't make an obvious change in the challenge. As the system stands right now, I have found not a single inconsistency through the last month of playtesting.

eg. A kobold is not as powerful as a 1st-level NPC.

You're now forgetting your own mantra. "Power isn't everything." Remember that the kobold has LOTS of things that the NPC does not. They just aren't all applicable in combat. Same goes for the goblin.

The differences can be sorted within EL I believe though.

The thing is it isn't necessary. Playtesting bears out your system so far, UK. I've been doing rigorous playtesting to check for myself. You remember how skeptical I was, right? Well if you could bring ME over to agree with you, what problems could possibly be left?

Certainly, factional CR should be tied to EL. In that CR 1/2 should be 2 points of EL less than CR 1. Since it represents the fact that two CR 1/2 creatures equal one CR 1, and as we know an increase of +2 EL is the same as doubling the number of opponents.

So if CR 1 = EL 1
CR 2/3 = EL 0
CR 1/2 = EL -1
CR 1/3 = EL -2
CR 1/4 or 1/5 = EL -3
CR 1/6 or 1/7 = EL -4
CR 1/8 to 1/11 = EL -5
CR 1/12 to 1/15 = EL -6
CR 1/16 to CR 1/23 = EL -7

The difficulty becomes assigning CR scores below 1. Although I think we arrived at an acceptable method above I am still not convinced it is perfect so I will do some more research on the matter.

Actually, your current system, although very slightly flawed, is as good as any system is ever going to get. Your current way of turning negative CRs into fractions works with every monster in the MM at least, so I'd say it gets a good grade. As for your proposal above . . . It's unnecessary! Leave the fractions AS FRACTIONS in EL! You have one less calculation and you get the EXACT same results. This also makes it easier for outsiders to come in because they don't have to rethink how fractional CRs are done.

If something is CR 1/2, let it be EL 1/2. If a party beats it, take the EL 1 XP and cut it in half. If there are two, it become EL 1. Simple as that, and without having to turn things back into a negative EL!

I know Eldorian mentioned that the CR factors may not be accurate enough when delving into fractions but I think it will be more accurate than if we do not.

Any comments?

The factors themselves are as good as they're going to get, I believe. Playtesting supports your system just about all the way now, UK! There may still be kinks here and there (gelatinous cube is CR 9/EL 13, which sounds WAY too high, and the CR 3/EL 7 ghoul still bugs me slightly), but overall, you got things as good as they're gonna get.

 

[Sonofapreacherman]

Upper Krust.

You have thrown your weight around before ... and it was warranted. In this case, however, it isn't. If you don't like the way Anubis and Eldorian post, then quote their replies. Don't quote mine. That's twice you've quoted me when addressing a group of people. Anubis in particular is a butterfly of opinions, all devoid of the ability to back themselves up (with anything more meaningful than his insistence of "being right"). Perhaps his above post finally clarified this for you? If it didn't, no matter. It doesn't and never will wash for me. Taking his feral tone-of-voice into account, I have been "polite" to say the least. In fact, I have been holding back for the sake of your initial request for civility. Basically, I am *already* on my best behavior. This is as good as it gets.

That said, I like your latest suggestion for the breaking down lower-level CR into fractions. There is an example of how I see those rules playing out in my reply to Anubis below. Tell me if what you think. Or don't. It's up to you.

-----

Anubis.

I see from reading your reply above, that you made no attempt to understand the "fodder" to "nemesis" issue, and danced around my challenge to ante up with your mathematical proof ... claiming now that "playtesting" is the key. You did, however, pointlessly regergatate Upper_Krust's rules like a parrot. Don't worry. I expected your house of cards to collapse.

As I suspected, you have no mathematical proof, but are correct about one thing. Playtesting *is* the key. And no, conceptual roleplaying doesn't count. You have to actually sit down at a table with at least four unpredictable players.

A single goblin warrior with NPC wealth (using Upper_Krust's system) is CR 0.2. You can dispute this if you like, but it would be futile to do so. Darkvision simply does not count unless you break Upper_Krust's rules to suit your own purposes. Something I'm sure you'll attempt to do anyways. Well, disregarding that attempt ... by taking the actual numbers into account (not mention actual no-breaks-for-the-players playtesting), the goblins solidly weighs in at CR 1/5 (using Upper_Krust's recently posted revisions).

That would mean 4 goblins against a standard 1st level party are worth 300 XP all told; or 75 XP per goblin.

-----

Upper Krust, if I did my calculations correctly, I would call this latest solution perfection.

 

[demiurgeastaroth]

Upper Krust.

<snip> Taking his feral tone-of-voice into account, I have been "polite" to say the least. In fact, I have been holding back for the sake of your initial request for civility. Basically, I am *already* on my best behavior. This is as good as it gets.

I really don't want to offend you, especially given that we see eye to eye on most issues with UKs system, but I do think you could have been a little less bombastic in your discussions with Anubis and Eldarion.
I'm not saying there wasn't provocation (far from it!), and I did chuckle at the "Anubis, I'm glad you're big enough to admit you're wrong" posts, but I can't believe that it has been your best possible behaviour.

Darren

 

[Anubis]

Upper Krust.

You have thrown your weight around before ... and it was warranted. In this case, however, it isn't. If you don't like the way Anubis and Eldorian post, then quote their replies. Don't quote mine. That's twice you've quoted me when addressing a group of people. Anubis in particular is a butterfly of opinions, all devoid of the ability to back themselves up (with anything more meaningful than his insistence of "being right").

I've given proof as to what I say while you have not.

Perhaps his above post finally clarified this for you? If it didn't, no matter. It doesn't and never will wash for me. Taking his feral tone-of-voice into account, I have been "polite" to say the least. In fact, I have been holding back for the sake of your initial request for civility. Basically, I am *already* on my best behavior. This is as good as it gets.

Well I'm done playing nice. You're starting to annoy me, and you don't want me to get annoyed. I'm trying really hard to maintain my composure now, but you are making it a difficult task.

That said, I like your latest suggestion for the breaking down lower-level CR into fractions. There is an example of how I see those rules playing out in my reply to Anubis below. Tell me if what you think. Or don't. It's up to you.

-----

Anubis.

I see from reading your reply above, that you made no attempt to understand the "fodder" to "nemesis" issue, and danced around my challenge to ante up with your mathematical proof ... claiming now that "playtesting" is the key. You did, however, pointlessly regergatate Upper_Krust's rules like a parrot. Don't worry. I expected your house of cards to collapse.

I will quote The Matrix now. "I can only show you the door. You have to walk through it."

I have shown you the math. It's not my fault if you're too slow to understand it.

As I suspected, you have no mathematical proof, but are correct about one thing. Playtesting *is* the key. And no, conceptual roleplaying doesn't count. You have to actually sit down at a table with at least four unpredictable players.

I gave mathematical proof. Also, I HAVE BEEN PLAYTESTING WITH AN ACTUAL GROUP. Shows how much you know.

A single goblin warrior with NPC wealth (using Upper_Krust's system) is CR 0.2. You can dispute this if you like, but it would be futile to do so. Darkvision simply does not count unless you break Upper_Krust's rules to suit your own purposes. Something I'm sure you'll attempt to do anyways. Well, disregarding that attempt ... by taking the actual numbers into account (not mention actual no-breaks-for-the-players playtesting), the goblins solidly weighs in at CR 1/5 (using Upper_Krust's recently posted revisions).

. . . and then your PCs die horrible deaths if you throw four or five such encounter at them.

That would mean 4 goblins against a standard 1st level party are worth 300 XP all told; or 75 XP per goblin.

Great, you got the numbers you wanted and increased PC mortality for it.

-----

Upper Krust, if I did my calculations correctly, I would call this latest solution perfection.

I call it stupidity.

 

[demiurgeastaroth]

Well I'm done playing nice. You're starting to annoy me, and you don't want me to get annoyed.

Will you go green and rip your shirt?

Darren

 

[Sonofapreacherman]

Howdy demiurgeastaroth.

I really don't want to offend you, especially given that we see eye to eye on most issues with UKs system, but I do think you could have been a little less bombastic in your discussions with Anubis and Eldarion.

No offense taken.

If bombastic is the worst I've been, then I really have been biting my tongue.



-----

Anubis.

I've given proof as to what I say while you have not.

Where is this proof? Saying there is proof and providing that proof are two different things. If your proof is so rock solid, as you seem to be claiming, then you should have no difficulty presenting it ... right now.

Well I'm done playing nice. You're starting to annoy me, and you don't want me to get annoyed. I'm trying really hard to maintain my composure now, but you are making it a difficult task.

Please don't make me laugh.



It took me 5 minutes to recover from that one.

*Wipes a tear out of eye.*

I will quote The Matrix now. "I can only show you the door. You have to walk through it."

Believe me when I tell you ... you are no Laurence Fishburne.

I have shown you the math. It's not my fault if you're too slow to understand it.

No. You have "referred" to the math. You have "shown" nothing. Deliver or don't. All you are doing now is stalling and (in so doing) wasting time better spent on finding ongoing solutions.

I gave mathematical proof. Also, I HAVE BEEN PLAYTESTING WITH AN ACTUAL GROUP.

Could have fooled me. While you may be playtesting *something*, it doesn't seem to be the goblin scenario we've been talking about.

Tell you what Anubis, if these numbers don't match up with your "idea" of balance, then perhaps you should simply change the rules to suit your own particular game.

See? Problem solved. Easy.

 

[Anubis]

Where is this proof? Saying there is proof and providing that proof are two different things. If your proof is so rock solid, as you seem to be claiming, then you should have no difficulty presenting it ... right now.

I HAVE . . . SEVERAL TIMES NOW IN FACT! Geez! Are you really that dense?

No. You have "referred" to the math. You have "shown" nothing.

Yes I have. Please take time to actually read my posts.

Deliver or don't.

I already have. Shall I quote myself now?

All you are doing now is stalling and (in so doing) wasting time better spent on finding ongoing solutions.

There is no stalling, and there is no need to come up with solutions. Since you seem hell-bent of ignoring the obvious proof I present to you, I think I'll simply turn the tables.

Why don't YOU offer proof that the system doesn't work?

Could have fooled me. While you may be playtesting *something*, it doesn't seem to be the goblin scenario we've been talking about.

Not your goblin scenario, no. I don't playtest tilted scenarios. Nope. In fact, my playtesting has been done during a campaign with encounters as normal per standard. No fields where the PCs see them coming miles away, no one character taking on many, simply a party of four PCs facing normal encounters in standard settings. We've had a cave and a castle so far and PLENTY of goblins, hobgoblins, and bugbears to go around. The numbers work, plain and simple. Where is your proof to the contrary? Oh, that's right, YOU HAVE NONE.

Tell you what Anubis, if these numbers don't match up with your "idea" of balance, then perhaps you should simply change the rules to suit your own particular game.

See? Problem solved. Easy.

You're overlooking the FACT that you and demiurgeastaroth are the ONLY PEOPLE WITH A PROBLEM WITH THE CURRENT SYSTEM. The system is designed to work in MOST situations. To change it by your specifications would make it good for you and screw it up for everyone else. Several people have already posted here about how the current system works and is not broken, yet you ignore those people. You are in the minority, man. It's two against the world, and playtesting shows the world to be right this time.

It's YOU who should "make changes" . . . PEL +4 sounds right . . . PEL +4 for the "DM Handicap" because you don't seem to have knowledge of the correct use of low-level baddies.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi all!

...okay my comeback a few days ago was a bit premature but you just can't keep a good man down.

Incidently the problem was in a dodgy stick of DDR Ram.

I'll read over the posts I have missed and try and get back up to speed with replies in a day or so (I am busy most of tomorrow). This includes hopefully putting this current crisis to bed.

Incidently I think I mentioned it to someone online but I have checked the Revised 3.5 Monsters and every single one of them seems to be two-thirds (pretty much exactly) of what it works out using my system.

Meaning that to propitiate 'tougher' monster challenges they seemingly lower the monsters CR by 2/3rds = EL -2.

eg. 3.5 Pit Fiend = CR 30 (my system) and CR 20 (WotC).

Any comments on that or other (non-crisis) affairs?