Revised CRs/ECLs continuation thread

[Sonofapreacherman]

Anubis.

You're overlooking the FACT that you and demiurgeastaroth are the ONLY PEOPLE WITH A PROBLEM WITH THE CURRENT SYSTEM.

No. Demiurgeastaroth and I the only two people who have successfully identified, isolated, and illuminated the problem with exaggerated lower level XP awards (not to mention help Upper_Krust find the solution). While you're asking to see the proof again, the proof has already been weighed and the problem has already been solved. You are the *only* person still playing "catch-up"; and frankly, I won't play along anymore. You'll have to catch-up on your own.

I can take you to the mountain, I can point to the mountain and say that's it there, but if you still refuse to see the mountain, then I can't help you.

Edited because my spelling sux.

 

[Anubis]

Anubis.

No. Demiurgeastaroth and I the only two people who have successfully identified, isolated, and illuminated the problem with exaggerated lower level XP awards (not to mention help Upper_Krust find the solution). While you're asking to see the proof again, the proof has already been weighed and the problem has already been solved. You are the *only* person still playing "catch-up"; and frankly, I won't play along anymore. You'll have to catch-up on your own.

I can take you to the mountain, I can point to the mountain and say that's it there, but if you still refuse to see the mountain, then I can't help you.

Edited because my spelling sux.

You're out of your mind. What problem has been identified? Through playtesting, I see no inflated XP awards whatsoever. Like I said, just because you're an incompetent DM doesn't mean the system should change. Just learn to be a better DM and you'll see the real challenge levels.

No problem has been identified, in fact. UK has even said time and again about being skeptical of your claims, and if anything, the OVERWHELMING SUPPORT his CURRENT system gets combined with playtesting should tell him that you two are nothing but hot air with no valid reasoning.

 

[demiurgeastaroth]

You're out of your mind. What problem has been identified? Through playtesting, I see no inflated XP awards whatsoever. Like I said, just because you're an incompetent DM doesn't mean the system should change. Just learn to be a better DM and you'll see the real challenge levels.

No problem has been identified, in fact. UK has even said time and again about being skeptical of your claims, and if anything, the OVERWHELMING SUPPORT his CURRENT system gets combined with playtesting should tell him that you two are nothing but hot air with no valid reasoning.

While I would ordinarily bow to your superior intellect and debating skills, honed as I'm sure they have been in the most challenging of testing grounds (perhaps in front of the mirror - for who but a copy of Anubis could be a suitable challenge for the wit and wisdom of Anubis), the post above does amazingly contain an error (well, just one I want to comment on).

We claimed there were problems with XP at lower level.
UK agreed.

That's the point I wanted to make, but so you can see I'm not putting words into U_K's mouth, here are the details:

a) At low level (level 1 in particular), XP might be very high compared to official rules, and would mess up the normal rate of progression. U_K agreed this would happen, but didn't consider it a problem - from his POV, this was a feature, not a bug. I acept that. But he said he would consider including an optional rule to soften this affect.

b) Below a certain CR, rounding off to whole points is imprecise and potentially inaccurate. UK is working on a fractional CR system to handle this. Whether it ends up as an optional rule, or an integral system, is fine by me - I'd prefer the latter, but as long as it's included in some form I'll be happy. (In fact I think it would be easier to have the fractional rule as integral, and a comment: "if you don't like working with fractions, just round off to whole numbers".)

Darren

 

[Sonofapreacherman]

Through playtesting, I see no inflated XP awards whatsoever. Like I said, just because you're an incompetent DM doesn't mean the system should change.

And that is why your idea of playtesting counts for shinola. Thanks for making it even more obvious. Even Upper_Krust has repeatedly admitted that XP awards are inflated at lower levels using his system. A solution has since been created to solve that problem; one which has clearly flown over your head. You can't even see the inflated XP problem in the first place. While my replies may be bombastic, your language has long since become abusive. If your posts can't at least shroud themselves in cleverness, then learn how to censor yourself. Smarten up Anubis, I'm done listening to your "hoof-scrapings".

Edited because apparrantly the word "sh-i-t" gets replaced with smiley faces.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hello.

Gelatinous Cube = CR 7 (the mistake is in the Ooze Type which should be +0.6 instead of 2.6).

The Ghoul is correct at CR 3

 

[Anubis]

We claimed there were problems with XP at lower level.
UK agreed.

No, he said that the numbers are more than the WotC system. He has yet to say that it is a "PROBLEM". Why? BECAUSE IT ISN'T.

That's the point I wanted to make, but so you can see I'm not putting words into U_K's mouth, here are the details:

a) At low level (level 1 in particular), XP might be very high compared to official rules,

Now you speak the truth. Inflated "compared to official rules", not overly inflated in an of themselves. These awards that seem inflated to you are merely the CORRECT awards based on the challenges of the encounter.

and would mess up the normal rate of progression.

It doesn't mess anything up, it just changes it.

U_K agreed this would happen, but didn't consider it a problem - from his POV, this was a feature, not a bug. I acept that. But he said he would consider including an optional rule to soften this affect.

I have no problem with that, hence the "PEL Modifier" I proposed where DMs could set a PEL modifier to reduce XP awards. This is the perfect solution, yet you've all ignored it, wanting the base system changed.

b) Below a certain CR, rounding off to whole points is imprecise and potentially inaccurate.

This is absolutely wrong and I have already given UK proof to this. Now I will give you that same proof. First, I am assuming that you are speaking of the system to make CR 1.25=EL 2, CR 1.5=EL 3, CR 1.75=EL 4, etc. Well then, shall I give two ABSOLUTE indications of proof? The Tiny Viper works out to CR 1.575, CR 1/EL 1 under the current system. Under the changes, however, this thing would be CR 1.5/EL 3! As if the EL 1 wasn't bad enough! If I have to explain how wrong it is for a weak creature with 1 hp to be EL 3, then you shouldn't be playing this game at all. Now we move to the Gnoll, which is CR 1.400, CR 1/EL 1 under the current system. This number is pretty perfect, as one of these is a 20% challenge for a Level 1 party. Under these changes, however, it would be CR 1.25/EL 2! Not as bad as the other, but I have proven my point.

If instead you are talking about the fractional CRs/ELs under 1, then please just refer to my proposition of counting fractions as in the book, with CR 1/2 being EL 1/2 and thus two EL 1/2 creatures being EL 1, etc.

If this is about multiple goblins being worth EL 3 and the weird increments of fractions, well, that's your problem. You may think that goblins are rated too high right now, but playtesting shows otherwise. Four goblins are accurately rated at EL 3. More than 20% but less than 50/50. Only bad DMing makes these things too easy.

UK is working on a fractional CR system to handle this. Whether it ends up as an optional rule, or an integral system, is fine by me - I'd prefer the latter, but as long as it's included in some form I'll be happy. (In fact I think it would be easier to have the fractional rule as integral, and a comment: "if you don't like working with fractions, just round off to whole numbers".)

Darren

Except WE ALREADY HAVE FRACTIONS! The changes to those fractions are what I have a problem with. Right now, using flat fractions, things work out fine. CR 1/2 is EL 1/2, CR 1/4 is EL 1/4, etc. The current ratings for those fractions have shown to be FLAWLESS in playtesting thus far.

And that is why your idea of playtesting counts for shinola. Thanks for making it even more obvious.

My playtesting is actual gaming. That kinda stuff CAN'T be refuted, plain and simple. I play goblins by the book, and the ratings are fine as-is.

Even Upper_Krust has repeatedly admitted that XP awards are inflated at lower levels using his system.

Inflated "compared to WotC's rules", not inflated in and of themselves. Let's not forget those inflated awards come primarily when you have a party of less than four PCs.

A solution has since been created to solve that problem;

The only acceptable proposal I've seen is to base XP per person instead of per party by making things with Party Level x 75 XP per person. Even that is a bit inaccurate, though, and does not properly gauge the challenges.

one which has clearly flown over your head.

Lots of things fly over your head.

You can't even see the inflated XP problem in the first place.

That's because THERE IS NONE. How many times must people around here hammer that into your thick skulls?

While my replies may be bombastic, your language has long since become abusive.

People whose arguments ignore logic just really upset me is all, and I lose my temper easily when confronted with such crap.

If your posts can't at least shroud themselves in cleverness, then learn how to censor yourself. Smarten up Anubis, I'm done listening to your "hoof-scrapings".

I'm a direct guy. I don't dance around issues. I say what I mean and mean what I say. If you don't like it, too bad. You tell me to smarten up, I'm telling you to get yourself some logic before further debating with me. You're starting to just aggravate me at this point, and you're making yourself look bad in the process with your lack of logic.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hello.

While I would ordinarily bow to your superior intellect and debating skills, honed as I'm sure they have been in the most challenging of testing grounds (perhaps in front of the mirror - for who but a copy of Anubis could be a suitable challenge for the wit and wisdom of Anubis), the post above does amazingly contain an error (well, just one I want to comment on).

Disappointed in you mate, I thought you were above the slagging match.

We claimed there were problems with XP at lower level.
UK agreed.

That's the point I wanted to make, but so you can see I'm not putting words into U_K's mouth, here are the details:

a) At low level (level 1 in particular), XP might be very high compared to official rules, and would mess up the normal rate of progression. U_K agreed this would happen, but didn't consider it a problem - from his POV, this was a feature, not a bug. I accept that. But he said he would consider including an optional rule to soften this affect.

Indeed. I had proven as fact that low level characters were more fragile, therefore an elevated measure of XP at those levels is not only accurate, but warranted!

b) Below a certain CR, rounding off to whole points is imprecise and potentially inaccurate.

Its not inaccurate if you are resigned to using whole points. But I would agree its potentially less accurate.

UK is working on a fractional CR system to handle this. Whether it ends up as an optional rule, or an integral system, is fine by me - I'd prefer the latter, but as long as it's included in some form I'll be happy. (In fact I think it would be easier to have the fractional rule as integral, and a comment: "if you don't like working with fractions, just round off to whole numbers".)

Whether integral or optional depends on how simple I can get the mechanic. If I am happy its simple enough I'll probably run with it.

 

[demiurgeastaroth]

Hello.



Disappointed in you mate, I thought you were above the slagging match.

What do you mean? I was entirely complimentary!
<crawls away to hide in shame>

Darren

 

[Sonofapreacherman]

This is absolutely wrong and I have already given UK proof to this. Now I will give you that same proof. First, I am assuming that you are speaking of the system to make CR 1.25=EL 2, CR 1.5=EL 3, CR 1.75=EL 4, etc.

And this is where you gut yourself. The current system being discussed goes as follows...

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

You even quoted this system yourself, but conveniently addressed an earlier incarnation of this solution to shore up your own pointless (read: selective) argument.

*Shakes head.*

As I understand this system (the one I just reposted Anubis), any creature that rates between CR1 and CR2 still gets rounded down to CR1. Except that with this proposal, goblins are not the equals of hobgoblins and orcs. Normally that revelation would be enough to activate a light is most people's heads. You on the other hand? Well, there's no accounting for some people's mental blindness.

I'm a direct guy. I don't dance around issues. I say what I mean and mean what I say.

Actually, you are the most evasive person I know on these boards. When asked to provide proof, repeatedly now, you dance around the challenge and fail to provide squat.

I guess that's why they call it the conceit of self-perception.

You are probably the exact opposite of how you see yourself. But hey, if those are qualities you'd *like to have*, then all the power to you. Everybody needs goals Anubis. Good luck achieving yours.

 

[Anubis]

And this is where you gut yourself. The current system being discussed goes as follows...

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

You even quoted this system yourself, but conveniently addressed an earlier incarnation of this solution to shore up your own pointless (read: selective) argument.

*Shakes head.*

As I understand this system (the one I just reposted Anubis), any creature that rates between CR1 and CR2 still gets rounded down to CR1. Except that with this proposal, goblins are not the equals of hobgoblins and orcs. Normally that revelation would be enough to activate a light is most people's heads. You on the other hand? Well, there's no accounting for some people's mental blindness.

I'll do this one politely. Besides, it's easy to shoot holes in this now that I've studied your numbers.

Lemme see if I recall UK correctly here . . . If CR rounds down to 0, it is CR 2/3, and if CR rounds to -1, it is CR 1/2. Yep. Now it's time to kill the entire basis of your arguments.

Ya' know what's really funny? Under your system, goblins, hobgoblins, and orcs STILL rate the same, and four goblins STILL come to EL 4!

You obviously failed to calculate these creatures. BOTH rate at CR 0.800 exactly. Oh, wait, lemme guess . . . You didn't take all teh goblins' bonus abilities into account! Yeah, you can't forget the +4 racial bonus to Move Silently, the +6 bonus to Ride checks, and the Mounted Combat feat. Orcs come in at CR 0.600 on the dot. That's right . . . That makes goblins AND hobgoblins AND orcs CR 2/3 and thus EL 0, making four of any of them EL 4!

Now I know what you'll say, you'll try to say not to count the bonus goblins stuff because it only applies when they're mounted. Unfortunately, the system says to take ALL things into account REGARDLESS of whether it's used or not, which kills your argument. Of course you'll also probably play the Darkvision trump card, right?

Well, even funnier is that EVEN IF you discount the goblins' bonuses and the Darkvision, the results are STILL THE SAME! Discounting all that stuff, goblins come in at CR 0.200 (STILL CR 0 and thus CR 2/3), hobgoblins come in at CR 0.600 (STILL CR 0 and thus CR 2/3), and orcs come in at CR 0.400 (STILL CR 0 and thus CR 2/3)!

Next, you'll probably say to drop all racial modifiers that don't collectively add up to more then 0.5, and I'm ready for that as well. Goblins and hobgoblins come in at 0.200 in total racial abilities and orcs come in at 0.000 in total racial abilities. That leaves only their class rating. All three count as warriors (stated outright as such in the book) and thus all three come in at 0.600 overall not counting any racial abilities whatsoever. Guess what? All three are STILL CR 2/3 and thus EL 0!

Shall I show you how they all add up? Gladly:

GOBLIN

Small Size: CR -0.5
Speed +10: CR +0.1
Darkvision: CR +0.2
Skills +10: CR +0.2
1 Bonus Feat: CR +0.2
Warrior Level 1: CR +0.6

Total: CR 0.8 ; 0.4 (not counting Ride +6 and Mounted Combat) ; 0.6 (not counting any racial modifiers)

HOBGOBLIN

Darkvision: CR +0.2
Warrior Level 1: CR +0.6

Total: CR 0.8 ; 0.6 (not counting any racial modifiers)

ORC

Darkvision: CR +0.2
Light Sensitivity: CR -0.2
Warrior Level 1: CR +0.6

Total: CR 0.6

Ya' know, what makes it EVEN funnier is that MY proposal lowers the value of goblins to EL 1/2 and makes four of them EL 3! So now my way rates them lower than yours!

Actually, you are the most evasive person I know on these boards. When asked to provide proof, repeatedly now, you dance around the challenge and fail to provide squat.

I gave ample proof. You simple chose to ignore it.

I guess that's why they call it the conceit of self-perception.

You are probably the exact opposite of how you see yourself. But hey, if those are qualities you'd *like to have*, then all the power to you. Everybody needs goals Anubis. Good luck achieving yours.

Now who's throwing meaningless insults? I think this post will be direct enough for you and it SHOULD show you the error of your ways. You're wrong, get over it.