CR increases for advancing creatures

[Mordane76]

Okie...

I remember reading somewhere that CR does increase as creatures advance, in the (unerrattaed) MM, it says that it doesn't. That seems very counter-intuitive. Does anyone know the formula Wizards gave for that advancement? Is it different than the one give for increasing the XP awarded?

 

[Grazzt]

According to the 3.0 rules, monsters increase in CR by +1 for every 50% increase in HD.

 

[Mordane76]

Thanks...

 

[Knight Otu]

It might be worth noting that SavSpe uses a different "formula" that basically says +1 per 2 Hit Dice.

For what's its worth, I believe that the truth is somewhere in between.

 

[Endur]

I think the Savage Species rule is the 3.5 rule for advancing CRs (which will appear in the revised Monster Manual). And it makes much more sense than the 3.0 rule.

Tom

It might be worth noting that SavSpe uses a different "formula" that basically says +1 per 2 Hit Dice.

For what's its worth, I believe that the truth is somewhere in between.

 

[S'mon]

I think the Savage Species rule is the 3.5 rule for advancing CRs (which will appear in the revised Monster Manual). And it makes much more sense than the 3.0 rule.

It certainly makes more sense - and in most cases 2 monster hd are at least as good as 1 class level. It may slightly overrate some big dumb monsters though, especially oozes, vermin & such.
I recommend eyeballing it. I tend to use:

Big dumb monster: CR = 1/2 hd
Typical monster: CR = 3/4 hd
Monster with lots of special powers: CR = hd

So many things are directly linked to hd that the relationship tends to stay good.

 

[Gez]

Even with the current rule, a fully advanced assassin vine gets a CR seriously above its actual worth.

Most monsters may triple their HD, which, with the actual system, means a +4 CR increase.

Now, is a 66 HD solar a CR 23 or a CR 41 encounter, it's a bit hard to tell...

 

[S'mon]

Even with the current rule, a fully advanced assassin vine gets a CR seriously above its actual worth.

Most monsters may triple their HD, which, with the actual system, means a +4 CR increase.

Now, is a 66 HD solar a CR 23 or a CR 41 encounter, it's a bit hard to tell...

Well, the regular Solar appears to be about CR 22, if you look at the stats. If doubling hd = +2 CR then 66hd would be CR 26. I suspect that using the Epic rules, the 66 hd Solar works out more like CR 44. In a non-epic game there's an effective cap at CR 28 anyway.
A lot depends though on what extra treasure it gets, and what level its abilities are used at - if you eg let it use all its abilities at a level equal to its hd, it'd be nearer CR 66 (_pace_ Krusty).

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi all!

Well, the regular Solar appears to be about CR 22, if you look at the stats. If doubling hd = +2 CR then 66hd would be CR 26. I suspect that using the Epic rules, the 66 hd Solar works out more like CR 44. In a non-epic game there's an effective cap at CR 28 anyway.
A lot depends though on what extra treasure it gets, and what level its abilities are used at - if you eg let it use all its abilities at a level equal to its hd, it'd be nearer CR 66 (_pace_ Krusty).

Challenge Ratings are the disease and I am the cure!

http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=45989

Incidently I noticed that many of the MM monsters have CRs about half what I would set. The flaw in the official rules is that they don't work out the monsters as a moderate challenge (as they should) but rather more often closer to difficult challenges.

The Solar works out at CR 52 (26*). One of the problems with its CR is that it breaks certain design parameters since it has equipment for a 46th-level PC!

*Meaning its a difficult challenge at this point.

The pdf in the link above explains everything.

 

[WizarDru]

UK, I don't know if you created that document, but it's VERY hard to read. The fonts do not serve the document well.

That said, I think that PDF fails to understand the main prupose of CRs...to SIMPLIFY creating challenges for the DM. If I'm sitting around, calculating long formulas using percentages based on hit dice, ability increases and so forth, that's time I'm not actually spending playing the game.

Second, CRs are a guideline. Abilities of individual parties vary wildly, so that's where ELs come in. The system in the PDF seems to emphasize radically increasing most CRs, and then using ELs to lower situations back down....all of which doesn't seem to provide much more utility for the DM; it's just reinventing the wheel to satisfy the author's sense of verisimilitude. There's nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't sound like it helps the DM much more than just simply 'eyeballing' it. A group with a Radiant Servant of Pelor is certainly more likely to deal with a high-powered undead or creatures who use darkness than one without. A group of four barbarians is going to find a spectre much more challenging than a group of four clerics. The CR system needs to deal with that.

At low levels, the CR system has much less of a problem with this. But at higher levels, with insta-kill 'save or die' powers, calculating CR becomes more problematic. Especially when you consider that the characters LIVES are considered a resource. If three of the players survive with all but one spell intact, they've maintained their resources in line with the formula. It's terribly unsatisfying, but there it is.

Note how monsters are filled with abilities that would be incredibly powerful in a PCs hands...but the monster is only going to get one combat to use them, generally. My players party level is a collective 19...but they've defeated a CR23 creature, with no loss of life. They followed that up with defeating a Paragon half-fire Elemental Beholder. Under the CR system listed above, I'm assuming both of these encounters would have been in the 40s or higher. Which illustrates that the CR system is a tricky beast, in either system.