Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="77IM" data-source="post: 7593218" data-attributes="member: 12377">These are great points. To me, the spell-level system provides the basis for those debates, and is extremely valuable for that reason. We can debate whether flame strike should really be 5th level when it's arguably no better than fireball, but nobody's really arguing for flame strike to be 1st level, nor 7th level.Another system I like to compare to is Challenge Rating. We all know that CR isn't perfect; in some ways, it is deeply flawed. But it's still super useful.For example, we can debate whether a Nightstalker is really CR 20 considering its complete vulnerability to save-or-suck effects -- but you know not to throw one at a level 4 party, and really you know to be careful throwing it at a level 15 party.Or look at something like a CR 8 young dragon; how will a party of 4th-level characters fare? Well if the dragon gets the drop on them it could go badly. But if the party has like 7 members and they are prepared for this dragon then it may be a difficult fight, but they will likely win. If it's a party of 12th-level characters loaded up with anti-dragon magic items, well, it will be a cake walk.That's what I want for magic items, just a rough number gauging usefulness relative to other items. Rarity could have been that number. But they got it wrong often enough that it doesn't really work for me, and it's a little too coarse-grained. (Like if monsters were rated by Tier: there's a big difference between CR 5 and CR 10, but both would be lumped into "Tier II".)What is the CR of a wraith? Now, what is the CR of a wraith in a party full of clerics? What is the CR of a lycanthrope in a party with no magic items and no spellcasters? What is the CR of a fire elemental in a party full of spellcasters with only fire magic? What about a party full of spellcasters with only water magic?Everything is campaign dependent. The rules are supposed to provide a baseline.</blockquote>

Verification