Are Giants Overpowered?

[Liquidsabre]

Let me ask this: Do you agree that a stone giant is about as powerful as a 12th-level NPC Fighter? Do you think they should have the same CR? If so, what would it be?

Why not compare a 12th-level NPC Wizard? Same CR as the stone giant as well.

 

[Someone]

Let me ask this: Do you agree that a stone giant is about as powerful as a 12th-level NPC Fighter? Do you think they should have the same CR? If so, what would it be?

No, it´s not, but it deserves a more detailed answer.

Suppose we clone a 7th-level party and make them fight. By definition, that´s a very difficult fight, with a 50% chance of either party winning and most likely, it´ll end with a lot of dead people in the two sides (if they fight to the death). Thus is a EL 11 encounter. Since they are four, that means that only one of them should be CR 7.

Let´s look at the giant, supposing a CR 7 giant (a hill giant, IIRC). It´s supposed that a party should spend 1/4 of their resources fighting him: spells and potions, hit points, etc. We agree that this is not always true, but at least is how the CR and EL system is designed.

Is the CR 7 hill giant equal to the party´s figher CR 7 in a pit fighting, gladiatorial match? No, most of the time the giant will beat the fighter into the proverbial bloody pulp. I´ll add, to make the paradox bigger, that I think that a 7th level party would find easier to beat 4 hill giants than clones of themselves.

What happens then? The picture is bigger than the actual numbers in the character´s sheets; the party´s combined, if played properly, weight more than the giant´s combined brute force.

That conclusion is, obviously, that the CR and EL system is not perfect. Fighters and other classed characters are only worth their CR when supported by other classed characters. Groups of monsters entirely built around a single strong point (and with obvious weak sides) are easier to fight against than the combined EL would suggest.

However, I´m reasonably happy with the system: Improving it´s accuracy would make it harder to use, and the failures are easy to correct once you know where does it fail.

 

[joelmarcus]

IMHO ihe real question is not if a Giant is the correct CR in a book. The real question is how much damage do you want to inflict on your party and will it be fun? The CR is a general guideline and positioning can be a factor. IE if a party is in the early morning preperations of waking up after a night of activity and/or combat sleeping in a protected ravene and a Hill Giant is at the edge of ready to toss a few good sized rocks on thier little sleepy heads will change a CR from moderate to deadly. Also having that said the reverse is true the Giant is in the ravene and the party sneaks up on him it signifigantly lowers the CR from moderate to easy. just my 2 bits in.

 

[dcollins]

That conclusion is, obviously, that the CR and EL system is not perfect. Fighters and other classed characters are only worth their CR when supported by other classed characters. Groups of monsters entirely built around a single strong point (and with obvious weak sides) are easier to fight against than the combined EL would suggest.

So then what is (for this admitted aproximate system) the proper CR? It sounds like your answer is: "variable, depending on who else they are with"? If so, that's a radical break with the idea of the CR system that everyone does in fact have some defined individual CR.

 

[dcollins]

Why not compare a 12th-level NPC Wizard? Same CR as the stone giant as well.

That begs the question, in that you're answering those questions (for a wizard) as "Yes, Yes, and 12". The whole inquiry here is whether the CRs for giants are correct in the first place.

Remember, per the book a stone giant is not CR 12, he's only CR 8, even though the demonstration shows he has the exact same punching power as an NPC Ftr12. Do you think that's a problem, or not?

 

[Darklone]

I would say not. The NPC Ftr12 has much more versatility depending on his choice of feats and/or magic items.

 

[Someone]

So then what is (for this admitted aproximate system) the proper CR? It sounds like your answer is: "variable, depending on who else they are with"? If so, that's a radical break with the idea of the CR system that everyone does in fact have some defined individual CR.

Well, yes, that´s my (humble) opinion after these years playing and DMing D&D, that encounters are actually more or less difficult depending on that and a lot of other things, and it requires some experience and common sense to gauge the actual encounter´s difficulty. I´d still say, though, that the CR and EL system is a really useful tool as it is.

 

[Olive]

I've thrown multiple hill giants against my players recently, and they've had no problems with them. Ray of enfeeblement (metamagiced) is irritatingly effective: terrible touch AC, and completely dependent on strength makes giants fall over smart quick!

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Remember, per the book a stone giant is not CR 12, he's only CR 8, even though the demonstration shows he has the exact same punching power as an NPC Ftr12. Do you think that's a problem, or not?

My answer is "usually not a problem". The predictability of the giant's strengths and weaknesses is a big strike against them.

 

[S'mon]

3.0 giants seem about right for their CR IME - commoner stat array, poor Will saves & such. A classed giant with elite array or similar will likely be much tougher though - I had a 2nd level troll barbarian who did over 150 dmg recently in 2 rounds to a 13th level PC dwarf Paladin with a low AC.