1 Golem, 3 Ways, 7 Challenge Ratings -- HELP!

[Garnfellow]

One reason for Constructs to only gain 1 CR / 4 HD is the lack of Skills and Feats. Adding these should place the Construct in the 1 CR / 3 HD, thus we get roughly a CR 17 from adding 17 HD and a Size increase.

I had a similar thought myself. If you take Dcollin's suggestion that the book CR of 10 is too low, and assume CR 13 is closer, and then use your suggestion that Intelligent constructs should get +1 CR for every +3 HD, then you get 13, +5 CR, +1 for size = CR 19 for the 33 HD golem, and CR 18 for the golem with 5 levels of fighter. Much closer to the other results.

 

[Garnfellow]

If I remember right, UK's CR rules don't produce a CR that you use in the same way as the WOTC CR. (It really ought to have been called something different to avoid confusion.) I never muddled through the rules well enough to get a sense for the relationship, though.

Grim Tales multiplies the UK value by 2/3, which seems to produce something more like a WotC Challenge Rating. I have not yet made up my mind on this system.

 

[Garnfellow]

But a far more likely hypothesis is simply that the quality of CR estimations (and playtesting) has been going down every year since the release of 3.0 (and reduction of WOTC design & editing staff).

I think there's something to this, although the MMII, one of the earliest releases, had probably the wonkiest CRs of any monster book. As a side effect to downsizing, I think they're probably doing less playtesting with fewer staff -- and the folks doing the playtesting are probably designers who are naturally very, very good at applying metagame logic to in-game encounters. They know when to pull back and use indirect attacks, etc. Wheras a more typical group has to learn the hard way.

 

[Saeviomagy]

They know when to pull back and use indirect attacks, etc. Wheras a more typical group has to learn the hard way.

I think that the reason the golem's CR (and, in fact, all golem's CRs) is so low is the fact that it's crap.

It's an easy challenge.

It doesn't matter what it's hitpoints are, or what it's melee attacks can do - a player with a brain is expected to NOT go toe-to-toe with it.

Full stop.

I mean - if you really think that your golem is too hard for it's CR when advanced, take a peek at the colossal scorpion, or the advanced stone golem, or the tarrasque.

Monsters with no ranged abilities and no capability for flight get very little in the way of CR, and with good reason. They're cakewalks.

As for "you must kill the monster to get the XP" - that's just plain crazy talk. It was stupid in 2nd ed, and it's stupid now.

Finally - note that if you give the critter class levels, you're supposed to give it equipment too. I'd say even giving the thing a bow should increase it's CR by a big margin.

 

[Fieari]

The purpose of U_K's system is to make it so that a level X PC is equivelent in power to a CRX creature. It then goes on to use ELs in order to set appropriate challenges for the party. It's quite accurate, but does require a little bit more preperation, while the standard WotC method is less accurate (and becomes absurdly less accurate as your levels increase, esspecially past epic levels) but requires less DM preperation. For low to mid level campaigns, U_K's method isn't needed, but again, that's not what U_K's method was designed for.

 

[drnuncheon]

As a side note, I would never consider giving class levels to a monster that didn't say "Advancement: By class". Yes, the rules mechanics can statistically handle it, but for most monsters (like automoton golems) the idea is rather cartoonish.

So in short, the normal case is killing monsters. The abnormal case, getting by them, is maybe-yes, maybe-no according the circumstances and the DM.

Careful with the quotes there - I think these are both dcollins, not me.

 

[Garnfellow]

Careful with the quotes there - I think these are both dcollins, not me.

Oops -- sorry about that. Will fix promptly.

 

[Garnfellow]

I think that the reason the golem's CR (and, in fact, all golem's CRs) is so low is the fact that it's crap.

It's an easy challenge.

It doesn't matter what it's hitpoints are, or what it's melee attacks can do - a player with a brain is expected to NOT go toe-to-toe with it.

Full stop.

Yeah, that's a good place to stop. Are you familiar with this monster at all? It's basic concept is that it's an expert tracker that relentlesly hunts down its target, as with the terminator: "It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead."

Sooner or later, the PCs will have to go toe-to-toe with it.

As for "you must kill the monster to get the XP" - that's just plain crazy talk. It was stupid in 2nd ed, and it's stupid now.

You might want to reread what was actually posted. I wasn't suggesting that the monster must be killed to get XP. I suggested that the monster is normally fought to the death when WotC designers run playtests to check the Challenge Rating. For what it's worth, I completely agree that full XP should be awarded for bypassing a monster, and have run it that way since 1st edition.

Finally - note that if you give the critter class levels, you're supposed to give it equipment too. I'd say even giving the thing a bow should increase it's CR by a big margin.

I'd say a +3 wounding greataxe is pretty darn good equipment for a 10th level PC or a 15th level NPC.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Yeah, that's a good place to stop. Are you familiar with this monster at all? It's basic concept is that it's an expert tracker that relentlesly hunts down its target, as with the terminator: "It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead."

Or until you fly over it's head and pelt it with crap. Or just teleport or fly away - you can't track a flying target.

Hell - running up or down river gives you a chance to lose the thing for a while.

The creature is fundamentally lacking in the qualities that make a high-level creature challenging. Making it bigger and stronger just changes how thick the wall the PC's are butting their heads against is.

Sooner or later, the PCs will have to go toe-to-toe with it.

If they've got no better plan than "I hit it with my sword", they really don't deserve to make it to the higher levels.

And as soon as they've got a plan that isn't melee, they win. Eventually they win, regardless of the creature's hitpoints or melee attack modifier.

You might want to reread what was actually posted. I wasn't suggesting that the monster must be killed to get XP. I suggested that the monster is normally fought to the death when WotC designers run playtests to check the Challenge Rating. For what it's worth, I completely agree that full XP should be awarded for bypassing a monster, and have run it that way since 1st edition.

At a guess - the designers run combats where neither the monster nor the PC's retire to prepare themselves specifically for the encounter. Otherwise the ability to greater teleport at will might be rated a tad bit higher than it currently is.

However I really doubt that they just stand there with their sword whacking the thing until it drops or they do. Otherwise creatures like the tarrasque, animals and vermin would have much, much higher CRs than they currently do.

I'd say a +3 wounding greataxe is pretty darn good equipment for a 10th level PC or a 15th level NPC.

Yeah, but that's not the gear the golem was given for his levels, is it? That's what he gets for being a golem. It's also not nearly as effective as giving him a +3 seeking merciful mighty composite longbow would be. Or some wings of flying.

Additionally, when you give him fighter levels, he should get more gear. Something as simple as an eversmoking bottle would significantly increase his offensive power (it makes him more-or-less immune to ranged tactics)

 

[dcollins]

Not disagreeing with anybody here, but this discussion makes me think of this from the WOTC website at http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/dx20020329x :

Introducing Call of Cthulhu monsters is one thing. It's a little more challenging to add an Elder God to your campaign. This picture from the book's appendix was inspired by a playtest session in which Monte sic'ed Great Cthulhu against 20th-level versions of Mialee, Regdar, and the other iconic D&D characters. "There were six players, and if you died you got to bring in a new 20th-level character the following round," Monte said. "Even faced with those odds, Cthulhu killed 13 of them before they killed him. Actually, they didn't kill him, they imprisoned him with an imprisonment spell -- because they just couldn't kill him."

The picture referred to above is here: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/CoC_55.jpg