Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FireLance" data-source="post: 3281273" data-attributes="member: 3424">An elf probably isn't best used as a straight melee combatant, unlike a dwarf or a half-orc. An elf should probably be an archer with Rapid Shot, Manyshot and a strength bow, or maybe a swashbuckler or skirmisher.I guess that NPCs require more DM skill to achieve maximum combat effectiveness, unlike simpler creatures like a stone giant, which can pretty much be used &quot;out of the box&quot;.Well, the fighter ignores hardness of 20 or less if armed with an adamantine weapon (as mentioned, +3,000 gp), so that gives him one slight edge in sundering compared to the stone giant. A stone giant's reach can negate most of the AOO problems from not having Improved Disarm and Improved Trip, but at least with respect to tripping, he doesn't get a free attack after tripping an opponent. Giving the fighter a spiked chain can also equalize his reach. It's not entirely in the stone giant's favor.I guess it depends on how you define &quot;close&quot;. He is certainly closer in power to a stone giant than an ogre (CR 3) or a troll (CR 5). A well-built 8th-level fighter might even be slightly closer in power to a stone giant than a hill giant (CR 7). I'm quite happy to give the 8th-level fighter the benefit of the doubt, but even if it was &quot;really&quot; CR 7, 7 is just one less than 8, right?For those of you who don't like the CR system, I'm curious to know what you'd use to replace it. And if your answer is something like DM experience or common sense, that's not really a good answer, because there's nothing to stop you from adding the CR system to your DM experience and common sense (or vice-versa) to get even better results. If you don't have anything to replace it, then I think I prefer the CR system to no system at all.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FireLance, post: 3281273, member: 3424"] An elf probably isn't best used as a straight melee combatant, unlike a dwarf or a half-orc. An elf should probably be an archer with Rapid Shot, Manyshot and a strength bow, or maybe a swashbuckler or skirmisher. I guess that NPCs require more DM skill to achieve maximum combat effectiveness, unlike simpler creatures like a stone giant, which can pretty much be used "out of the box". Well, the fighter ignores hardness of 20 or less if armed with an adamantine weapon (as mentioned, +3,000 gp), so that gives him one slight edge in sundering compared to the stone giant. A stone giant's reach can negate most of the AOO problems from not having Improved Disarm and Improved Trip, but at least with respect to tripping, he doesn't get a free attack after tripping an opponent. Giving the fighter a spiked chain can also equalize his reach. It's not entirely in the stone giant's favor. I guess it depends on how you define "close". He is certainly closer in power to a stone giant than an ogre (CR 3) or a troll (CR 5). A well-built 8th-level fighter might even be slightly closer in power to a stone giant than a hill giant (CR 7). I'm quite happy to give the 8th-level fighter the benefit of the doubt, but even if it was "really" CR 7, 7 is just one less than 8, right? For those of you who don't like the CR system, I'm curious to know what you'd use to replace it. And if your answer is something like DM experience or common sense, that's not really a good answer, because there's nothing to stop you from adding the CR system to your DM experience and common sense (or vice-versa) to get even better results. If you don't have anything to replace it, then I think I prefer the CR system to no system at all. [/QUOTE]

Verification