Anyone want Brownies?

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
I did the math on this one per DMG guidelines. It comes to defensive CR 1 and offensive CR 1/4. 1 + 1/4 = 1.25. divide by 2 comes to more than 1/2, so round up to 1.

It's a relatively weak CR 1, but by the math that where it lands.

EDIT: people, there's no need to guesswork. There are literally formulas to work this stuff out, and I'm confident you all have the book in which they appear.

LOL, I did the math as well, and you should check your work.

Defense: 7 hp would be CR 1/8, increased to CR 1/4 because of AC 13 increased to AC 15 raises CR level one stage (1/8 to 1/4)

Offense: 7 damage would be CR 1/2, increased to CR 1 because of attack +3 increased to attack +6 raises CR level one stage (1/2 to 1)

So, maybe you just put them down backwards because the Defensive CR is only 1/4 while the Offensive CR is 1. The total is still 1.25, divided by 2 is 0.625.

Also, you are rounding in the wrong direction. "Rounding the average up or down to the nearest challenge rating to determine your monster's final challenge rating." The average is 0.625, which rounds down closer to 1/2 than up to 1.

So, the CR should be 1/2.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Satyrn

First Post
LOL, I did the math as well, and you should check your work.

Defense: 7 hp would be CR 1/8, increased to CR 1/4 because of AC 13 increased to AC 15 raises CR level one stage (1/8 to 1/4)

Offense: 7 damage would be CR 1/2, increased to CR 1 because of attack +3 increased to attack +6 raises CR level one stage (1/2 to 1)

So, maybe you just put them down backwards because the Defensive CR is only 1/4 while the Offensive CR is 1. The total is still 1.25, divided by 2 is 0.625.

Also, you are rounding in the wrong direction. "Rounding the average up or down to the nearest challenge rating to determine your monster's final challenge rating." The average is 0.625, which rounds down closer to 1/2 than up to 1.

So, the CR should be 1/2.

This is what my math got me, too, but then I used my experience to tweak slightly. The Bob tells us this is

Because the hp are at the very bottom of the defensive range, I decided not to increase our because of the higher AC, for example. Similarly, I've found in play that when the monster's damage is as the really low levels like this has, the offensive CR isn't worth adjusting, either.

Your experience may, of course, vary, and giving this a higher CR might work for you.
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
This is what my math got me, too, but then I used my experience to tweak slightly. The Bob tells us this is

Because the hp are at the very bottom of the defensive range, I decided not to increase our because of the higher AC, for example. Similarly, I've found in play that when the monster's damage is as the really low levels like this has, the offensive CR isn't worth adjusting, either.

Your experience may, of course, vary, and giving this a higher CR might work for you.

Well, honestly I debated about bumping it at different points due to other abilities it has, but the hp is SO low, even with the decent AC, that it is difficult to justify it.

Anyway, I appreciate all the input and hope people like it. I am going to pitch it to my DM for a special familiar similar to imps and such. :)
 

Satyrn

First Post
Oh, and I noticed later that the brownie has mirror image, which gives it some better staying power, so I'd never give it just a CR 1/8 like I earlier suggested. I'd still go with 1/4,

But the other thing that my experience has told me - and this is probably the best advice I can give you - when the CR is less than 1, getting it wrong really doesn't matter. You have a number you're confident about. Keep it.
 

Ath-kethin

Elder Thing
LOL, I did the math as well, and you should check your work.

Defense: 7 hp would be CR 1/8, increased to CR 1/4 because of AC 13 increased to AC 15 raises CR level one stage (1/8 to 1/4)

Offense: 7 damage would be CR 1/2, increased to CR 1 because of attack +3 increased to attack +6 raises CR level one stage (1/2 to 1)

So, maybe you just put them down backwards because the Defensive CR is only 1/4 while the Offensive CR is 1. The total is still 1.25, divided by 2 is 0.625.

Also, you are rounding in the wrong direction. "Rounding the average up or down to the nearest challenge rating to determine your monster's final challenge rating." The average is 0.625, which rounds down closer to 1/2 than up to 1.

So, the CR should be 1/2.

Listen. When I condescendingly point you toward looking at a book, it's unfair of you to assume I read and understood it myself.

That is to say, I always round up, and I could have sworn that's what the instructions said. Did it change in errata or do I really just not remember it correctly? #putinmyplace #gladsomeoneelsechecked
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
Listen. When I condescendingly point you toward looking at a book, it's unfair of you to assume I read and understood it myself.

That is to say, I always round up, and I could have sworn that's what the instructions said. Did it change in errata or do I really just not remember it correctly? #putinmyplace #gladsomeoneelsechecked

LOL! Well, I would love to put you in your place more, but I can't. ;) You have NO idea how long it took me to understand the process and even now I still question the longer "stat block" system when you start taking everything else into consideration.

Either way, I toyed with making the CR 1/2 or 1 from the beginning. Quasits and Imps are both CR 1 I think, but the Pseudodragon is only CR 1/4. I wanted something comparable to present to the DM as a new familiar for my wizard. Now I am writing up the extra benefits it would confer.

And I don't mind having things challenged, it makes me focus those things for later on when I talk it over with the DM. :)
 

Prakriti

Hi, I'm a Mindflayer, but don't let that worry you
Everyone is overlooking the mirror image 1/day, which greatly increases the Brownie's effective HP.
 

Satyrn

First Post
Everyone is overlooking the mirror image 1/day, which greatly increases the Brownie's effective HP.

Yeah. I was. Then I wasn't.

(I also noticed that my first post was saying something I didn't intend. I said the math worked out to a low 1/4, but I meant that my reckoning of the math adjusted by my gut feeling placed it that low.)
 


Remove ads

Top