D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] CRs still out of whack?

[LokiDR]

The APL 6 party in my game just recently fought a large water elemental (CR 5). That elemental nearly killed 2 people before I reduced it to medium size so the party could get past it. 8 HD, 2 slams at +10 for 2d8+5, reach, and DR 5/- does not sound like a CR 5 to me.

Didn't the designers (Andy specifically) say work was being done to make CRs more closely fit the monsters, such as dragons? I didn't have problems with elementals before. Is this really a CR 5? Are there any other creatures with amazingly under(over)-rated CRs thanks to the new rules?

 

[Zogg]

Uh...how many people were in your party? Did they not have 1 fire spell? Was the party fresh from rest or had they been hammered by previous encounters? We need more information here, as an APL 6 party should have NO problem with a large water elemental.

 

[LokiDR]

Uh...how many people were in your party? Did they not have 1 fire spell? Was the party fresh from rest or had they been hammered by previous encounters? We need more information here, as an APL 6 party should have NO problem with a large water elemental.

The party was 5 people: a rogue/sorcerer, a mounted fighter, a houseruled fighter/wizard, a tinker, and a ranger. They weren't fresh, but no one was low on HP. The only fire spells in the party were the fighter/wizard, and that was only a cantrip.

Aside from the specifics of the encounter, doesn't the creature seem a bit out of wack? 68 hp is going to take at least a few fireballs to kill. DR 5/-? That is going to make any sort of melee contest be a death for most 5th level characters. Add to that the strong damage and you get an encounter that just doesn't seem to add up to a CR 5.

 

[Bauglir]

Why would they use fire spells? The water elemental has no special weakness to them, in fact it's stronger against them

Drench (Ex): The elemental’s touch puts out torches, campfires, exposed lanterns, and other open flames of nonmagical origin if these are of Large size or smaller. The creature can dispel magical fire it touches as dispel magic (caster level equals elemental’s HD).

 

[kreynolds]

The first "red flag" I noticed was the multiclassed characters. Without a straight-up fighter in the group, your without someone that gets two attacks a round and can deal out enough damage to get around that DR. With 68 hit points and a straight-up party of four, a large water elemental shouldn't be that bad.

How is the damage potential and to-hit potention of the party members? I'm getting the feeling that both are a little on the low side.

 

[Jhyrryl]

They may be trying to make things fit their CRs better, but they never said that they were going to make all creatures of a given CR equal in difficulty. Elementals are quite simply intended to be tough for their CR, just like the new hydra is supposed to be tough for its CR.

That aside, I'm going to have to say there's some problems with your party composition. It's their choice to not have a cleric, or a straight arcane spellcaster. Depending on the mounted fighter's feats, they may not even have a quality tank. But they've made those choices, so they should expect to run into situations that they really aren't prepared to handle. This sounds like one of them.

 

[Zogg]

Good point about the fire spells. Nevertheless, water elementals are slow and don't have any SR. Also, was the elemental or party not touching water? That's a -4 to attack & damage for the elemental right there. The PCs might not know this about the creature, but it would make sense that a water elemental would be less powerful if it isn't in water. Spells and ranged attacks would be highly effective and safe - perhaps the party just needs to adopt a new strategy. Why go up and bash something in the face when you can shoot it from afar? Granted it might take awhile to kill off the elemental with DR 5/-, but there is always the alternative option - RETREAT!

EDIT: Furthermore, it might help if the title of your thread actually reflected the content. The scenario you present has little to do with whether or not 3.5 is "better". And hating 3.5 was so...July.

 

[The Souljourner]

A Water Elemental trashed my party a few months ago too, and that was in 3.0. So I don't think there's anything different about 3.5.

I think the problem with water elementals is that they expect you to know that you're not supposed to be touching water when you fight it, so they take that into account by making it do extra damage and giving it +4 to hit.

Gotta agree with the no cleric comment - there's not even a paladin, bard or druid in the party! How are they expecting to live at the higher levels?

I do think CR 5 is a bit low, but DR 5/- is not the end of the world. You should be able to power over that... and what were the casters doing?

*shrug* So a bit of both - yeah it's kinda powerful, and yeah, I think you had a less than ideal party.

-The Souljourner

 

[MarauderX]

Good point about the fire spells. Nevertheless, water elementals are slow and don't have any SR. Also, was the elemental or party not touching water? That's a -4 to attack & damage for the elemental right there. The PCs might not know this about the creature, but it would make sense that a water elemental would be less powerful if it isn't in water. Spells and ranged attacks would be highly effective and safe - perhaps the party just needs to adopt a new strategy. Why go up and bash something in the face when you can shoot it from afar? Granted it might take awhile to kill off the elemental with DR 5/-, but there is always the alternative option - RETREAT!

EDIT: Furthermore, it might help if the title of your thread actually reflected the content. The scenario you present has little to do with whether or not 3.5 is "better". And hating 3.5 was so...July.

Tough for their CR? What is it then, CR=5.7? Then make them the next CR up. IMO, they should either be moved up/down in CR value, not made in degrees of CR toughness. And the last thing we need is a CR system using decimals after the already subjective integers just so we can compare which of the CR 5 critters is the 'toughest.'

To me the CRs are still way too subjective, and there is no telling what a CR 5 monster would do to even an APL 10 group of 4, if the fighter was down on HP, the wiz was out of spells, or whatever. I think the designers tried to evaluate all of the special abilities into catagories for determining CRs (as was done for XP in 2E), but those estimations could be too subjective to interpret also.

Even if it was an option, using ranged attacks against a DR/5- creature takes forever. Granted the party has a weak front line, but in a dungeon the thing might be able to corner the PCs one at a time and pummel them unless they have tumble... get out your swimming trunks, it's time for the slip-n'-slide!

 

[LokiDR]

The first "red flag" I noticed was the multiclassed characters. Without a straight-up fighter in the group, your without someone that gets two attacks a round and can deal out enough damage to get around that DR. With 68 hit points and a straight-up party of four, a large water elemental shouldn't be that bad.

How is the damage potential and to-hit potention of the party members? I'm getting the feeling that both are a little on the low side.

The to-hit potential is normal, if not good. There is 1 straight class fighter, who's secondary focus is bastard sword. Three of them have straight BAB. Damage might be a bit low, with no 2-handers, but that shouldn't be too much of a problem. The fighter has specialization in bastard sword and the fighter/wizard has "chanel spell" for any spell he can cast. The party may lack flying spells a plenty, but they should still be able to match a basic bruser creature. Both the tinker and the rogue nearly died. I think I would have killed the fighter/wizard if I had left the elemental as large.