[3.5e] Barbed Devil stats

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Quasqueton

One of the wonderful things D&D3 gave us was the standardized and fairly-easy-to-implement advancement rules. The standard mummy not tough enough for my 6th-level PCs? Advance it. Add class levels. Or ask the game designers to change the base stats so the out-of-the-book monster is too tough for your 3rd-level PCs now?

Remember, the base stats in the MM are considered the weakest and most common creatures of each type. Advancing them to challenge higher-level PCs is easy. Regressing them is not.

I disagree. The DM can't just evaluate CRs at a glance. WotC is supposed to publish accurate CRs, instead of demand that the DM figure out the CR for himself, and then add or subtract something from the monster.

Besides, adding class levels to an unbalanced monster won't fix the problem, and advancing a creature causes many problems. The rules for advancing a creature are not balanced IME, and it's very complicated going through all the math to do that, too.

MMu1

I have to say I'm very dissapointed to see that CR doesn't seem to be getting any more meaningful. Any system that insists this thing and an 11th level fighter represent the same level of challenge has major problems...

The CR system doesn't work for classed creatures. A 14th-level fighter is not an EL 14 encounter. Heck, even if he's working with a CR 16 creature (against a 15th-level party) he is not a decent challenge.

I hope that creatures with complicated tactics get a tactics session. A typical mummy doesn't need it, but a mummy lord could use one. The dragon needs one.

 

[Felon]

Re: Re: [3.5e] Barbed Devil stats

I feel lame, but could someone please tell me how the grapple check bonus became +22? I calculate a medium-sized creature with a BAB of +12 and a 23 Str to have a grapple check bonus of +18.

In Urban Arcanna, the Improved Grapple feat (which the barbed devil has) grants a +4 to all grapple checks (even defensive ones).

 

[EricNoah]

Ok, as I'm reading this I am starting to think that there's a faulty assumption somewhere.

I don't think that just because one CR 11 creature uses up 25% of an 11th level party of four characters it necessarily follows that one CR 11 creature should use up 100% of the resources of a lone 11th level character. I think there's a synergy that having 4 characters brings to the mix, a sort of "whole greater than the sum of its parts" thing going on.

 

[Felon]

The CR system doesn't work for classed creatures. A 14th-level fighter is not an EL 14 encounter.

Unless he's a dwarf....

 

[Kai Lord]

I would guess we're getting peeks at the "most changed" monsters. After all, a preview of a monster that hasn't changed at all would be kind of boring.

It'd be funny if they previewed an obscure monster from the MM just to see if the changes provoked a firestorm of controversy, only to reveal that the new monster was just an exact reprint of the old.

 

[satori01]

I have to admit I have skipped some of this thread to post this while my blood is still a little lukewarm.

Cries of backward compatability woes, while a justifiable serious concern, still confound me to the frequency of their arrival and the apparent ease of their solving.

If the pit fiend, or kython, or were-donkey have been altered in 3.5 to a higher CR, and one has an older module with an older version of that creature, you dont have to "upgrade" to the newer version, simply use the older version at the old CR.
You could even drasticaly change the appearance of the monster, change the monsters name, keep the basic stats, and voila you can impress your players with your monster design creativity.

It is the TV dinner style of game design.

 

[Plane Sailing]

If the pit fiend, or kython, or were-donkey have been altered in 3.5 to a higher CR, and one has an older module with an older version of that creature, you dont have to "upgrade" to the newer version, simply use the older version at the old CR.
You could even drasticaly change the appearance of the monster, change the monsters name, keep the basic stats, and voila you can impress your players with your monster design creativity.

An excellent point, well made.

It is true that "backwards compatibility" of monsters is going to be the least of concerns in most cases. The only people who might find some difficulty are those who have never played 3e, start with 3.5e and buy an old 3e module which says "look in the MM for stats" (like the WotC series did with all its standard monsters). Even that won't be a problem if the old SRD remains in existance alongside a new 3.5SRD.

Cheers

 

[Plane Sailing]

True, but one of the most blatant failings of the CR system has always been NPC's. Even the most basic premise is flawed, as an 11th level NPC does not have the same amount of gear as an 11th level PC.

Oh, I agree.

Although I can understand why the designers decided to factor treasure into considering how effective a PC (or creature?) is, I think it acts as a bit of a straightjacket because once that assumption is in there it is difficult to take out... and if part of the effectiveness of a classed character is his magic goods, you either give an enemy the full amount of treasure to make him an appropriate threat (and thus double the PC's treasure above their expected limits when they defeat him) or give him the amount of treasure you would like the PC's to get and see him struggling as a less effective opponent.

Ah well, I don't lose sleep over it, and I don't expect them to change it any time soon!

Cheers

 

[hong]

Simple, anyone that is running a 3rd ed module and simply uses the MM for "updating" it to revised 3rd ed.

A DM without the ability to find another suitable CR 9 encounter to replace the old CR 9 hamatula, with a book full of monsters in front of him/her, is incompetent to do the job.

 

[Schmoe]

Ok, as I'm reading this I am starting to think that there's a faulty assumption somewhere.

I don't think that just because one CR 11 creature uses up 25% of an 11th level party of four characters it necessarily follows that one CR 11 creature should use up 100% of the resources of a lone 11th level character. I think there's a synergy that having 4 characters brings to the mix, a sort of "whole greater than the sum of its parts" thing going on.

That's the point I was trying to make:

This becomes even more flawed, because increasing the numbers of PC's exponentially increases their capabilities, such that four PC's working in concert can take on much, much more than four times the opponent that a single PC could take on. So, when a monster is judged to be a CR 11, it is judged to be a suitable encounter for 4 PC's. However, this same monster, if it were to take on a PC one-on-one, would be far more than an even threat, and would most likely win the battle. So the discrepancy between monster CR's and NPC CR's is even more exaggerated than it otherwise would be.

... which is one of the biggest reasons that an 11th level NPC is far less than a CR 11 encounter.