Dire Tigers CR is WRONG.....

[IanB]

Clarification request: mechanics of blightfire?

 

[Upper_Krust]

Re: Limited use for new or epic?

Hi there LokiDR!

There are no good rules for creating your own CRs, like the formulas for item costs.

Funny enough thats what Andy Collins thought until I showed him the error of his ways.

Savage Species calculation of ECL don't fit the bill,

Simply because it was arbitrary rather than mechanical like my system.

so I can see a need for extension of the current system.

If you get the chance I would be happy to hear what you had to say about my system. Good or bad I appreciate all feedback.

Also, Epic levels bring their own mess, challange ratings being one.

Indeed, as Mr T would say: I pity the fool using the official CR system for epic campaigns. Sucka.

Lots of things tend to break down at Epic levels.

Some things do but I doubt its as bad as you would think especially after instigating the minor changes I advocate.

On the other hand, the system you are talking about can not possibly take into account the specifics of my party. If I allow my party to use the cheesy deeper darkness-blindsight trick, encounters with creatures that do not have blindsight or tremorsense are easier. If my party focuses on fire damage, a creature weak to fire is easier, and a creature immune to fire damage gets a lot harder.

But these are issues outlined in the DMG as situational modifiers. While we can't list every eventuality we can provide a framework of examples and how they could affect Encounter Levels.

Every system needs to be adjusted to the specific party. For those of us who don't dabble in creating new races, PrC, or other game elements all that often (most DMs I susspect), what does this system offer?

Accuracy; Balance; Certainty; promotes Experimentation; Flexibility; easy Integration; completely Modular; are a virtual Necessity at epic levels; Sensibly dictate things like monster advancement; and are Unlimited in that they function at any measure of power.

Is there a spreadsheet I can punch in 7 PCs of 5th level vs 3 girrillians and get a percent chance of the PCs winning?

Thats an interesting idea, shouldn't be too difficult. What program would be the most expedient in creating this?

Incidently:

7 5th-level PCs (CR 5 each) = Party Encounter Level 11 (10 + 5 - 4)

3 Girallons (CR 7 each) = Encounter Level 15 (12 + 3)

Therefore the encounter is EL +4 or 50/50 without any impacting situational modifiers.

This kind of complicated math for calculation of ELs would be nice if all the published material already used it, and I could just use the math for creating new elements.

Well when it gets published in Dragon magazine we will really see the proverbial hitting the fan.

But I can't just grab the numbers from the UK system and use them as "better CRs". I don't have a need to convert, and it won't solve all the problems inherent in challenging a group of individuals.

I'm curious are you going to adopt 3.5 Edition when it arrives?

As for Epic levels, I would call Epic D&D 3e and D&D 3e two different games. Epic levels have always been an addition to the standard rules, so I can accept the need to improve that addition. Not playing Epic games myself, I will leave that distinction to those that do.

I suppose thats fair enough.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi there!

Clarification request: mechanics of blightfire?

Blightfire (SU): When a Winterwight deals damage to a living opponent, a nght black flame begins to burn the opponents body. If the opponent fails a fortitude save (DC 35), it takes 4 points of permanent constitution drain. The opponent must continue to save every round for the next four rounds* (5 rounds total) to avoid losing another 4 points of permanent constitution drain per round. The creature regains 10 lost hit points when it drains 4 points of constitution, gaining any excess as temporary hit points. If the opponent is slain by the blightfire only icy fragments of the victim remain.

*Was getting the duration of Blazefire and Blightfire mixed up, my mistake.

 

[Storm Raven]

I never said it was a slight of my manhood. I simply said that I didn't appreciate your attitude. I didn't even ask for an apology. All I asked for was a clarification if I was mistaken in your attitude, and instead of providing that, you merely keep it up. Perhaps you should think about that.

Please. If you read an "attitude" into the comment "umm, no", then you have more problems to worry about than a bucketload of therapy could solve.

 

[WizarDru]

Okay I checked the Hunter of the Dead, nice to have around when dealing with undead, but it has nothing to protect it from Blightfire.

The original version of HotD doesn't, but the variant class "Shadowed of Pelor" does, which is what the player actually has. He's a 10th level version, which is why he's a lower-powered cleric than he'd prefer. However, he's specialized to deal with the undead. I didn't mention earlier because it would have required a lengthy explanation of the differences between the original version of the class and the one in use. Beyond that, a DC 35 Fort Save against an undead draining effect is not that hard to beat for an 18th level character. He has a reasonable chance of failure, but not a huge one.

The Winterwight would gain its Spell Resistance against Fire Shield meaning any penetration would be unlikely and damage would be minimal.

I didn't say it did any real damage....but everyone rolls a 1 sometime (or 00 or 01, depending on your preference).

Presumably this was in association with the recently amended version of haste...but we can skip that point.

? I'm not sure what you mean. Standard 3.0 Mass Haste, and he was casting two spells a round.

So some 17th-level PCs actually engaged the Winterwight and survived!? This is the area I am having difficulty visualising; which is why I mentioned it must have been their lucky day.

Probably because, for starters, you keep rounding down. Two of the PCs were 17th level, the rest were 18th. As for those epic attacks...they still miss when the characters are blinking or have similar items, as they did. Mirror images died in rapid succession, and several folks DID get blightfire....but when the combat only lasts five rounds in toto, it's not the big deal it could be.

That would have been my chosen method of elimination. Yet you say the Wizard failed eight SR checks and still had a Disintigrate left. I would have been 'in like Flynn' with that right from the offing.

Except that the players knew nothing about the winterwight's abilities or makeup until AFTER the battle, and when the first level 9 spell failed against his SR, they used their biggest guns first. Disintegrate was an extremely lucky break. I rolled a '1'. Had I rolled a 2 or greater, the entire combat might have gone the other way. But that's true of about fifty die rolls that night, so there you go. When something shrugs off your Meteor Swarm, Dominate Monster and Maximized, Empowered Sonic Ball and effectively says, "Is that all you got?", you work your way down to Disintegrate, right before you run.

By comparison, the self-same party, now 18th-19th level, encountered the Cathezar from "Bastion of Broken Souls". She ripped them a new one for a good chunk of the combat, before things went bad and she got out of dodge (eventually they'll learn to use Dimensional Anchor...although in the Cathezar's case, she has a cheap trick around that). She's only CR 21, according to the system, and she was much nastier. If she had a higher DR or SR like the winterwight had, I suspect she would have scored a TPK. She came much closer to doing so than the winterwight did.

All of which goes to show how CR is still, in my mind, going to remain an art, not a science. Both CR systems put the emphasis on the challenge, not the challengers. A ghast against a party of gnomish rogues could be a fast route to a TPK, while against a party of clerics, it's a speedbump. The CR system simply cannot do more than approximate an encounter, as there are far too many proximate factors to consider. That said, the core CR system is more useful to me, as it gives me a quick solution. Yours is clearly more precise, but it isn't quick...and with my limited amount of prep time, I'll take speed over precision.

 

[LokiDR]

Re: Re: Limited use for new or epic?

Hi there LokiDR!

Hey.

Funny enough thats what Andy Collins thought until I showed him the error of his ways.

Hold on buckaroo, your house rules are not published rules. When I say rules, I mean published rules. If your formulas make it into the revised DMG, we can have this discussion again in two months.

Simply because it was arbitrary rather than mechanical like my system.

Yes, more of an art. DMing really is more art than science.

If you get the chance I would be happy to hear what you had to say about my system. Good or bad I appreciate all feedback.

The needs your system fulfills are not needs I have. I might look at it, but I don't even have a current campaign to test it in.

Indeed, as Mr T would say: I pity the fool using the official CR system for epic campaigns. Sucka.

Ah, poor Epic rules, going the way of Psionics.

But these are issues outlined in the DMG as situational modifiers. While we can't list every eventuality we can provide a framework of examples and how they could affect Encounter Levels.

As I recall, the DMG guidelines give a few general examples, far from listing many of the common changes. This lend credience to the "DMing as an Art" theory.

Accuracy; Balance; Certainty; promotes Experimentation; Flexibility; easy Integration; completely Modular; are a virtual Necessity at epic levels; Sensibly dictate things like monster advancement; and are Unlimited in that they function at any measure of power.

Wow, are you in publications? I feel like I have just entered an advertisement . I'm glad you believe in your system.

Now here are my issues: Accuracy, Balance, and Certainty can not be gained unless you have complete knowledge of the situation. Your system lacks two pieces of the equation: my party makeup and the specifics of the situation. Flexibility only applies in adding new game elements, not in using creatures in new ways. Easy integration is questionable, since you are talking about changing the entire CR and ECL system, and that is a lot of monsters/NPC/PCs, but I would need to study it closer. Epic is...Epic. I don't think Epic games should be played the same way you play standard D&D. Monster advancement that works would be nice, if commonly used it and it wouldn't require other changes.

Thats an interesting idea, shouldn't be too difficult. What program would be the most expedient in creating this?

Incidently:

7 5th-level PCs (CR 5 each) = Party Encounter Level 11 (10 + 5 - 4)

3 Girallons (CR 7 each) = Encounter Level 15 (12 + 3)

Therefore the encounter is EL +4 or 50/50 without any impacting situational modifiers.

I would do it in a web form, but I work with web applications. ASP form creator would probably be easiest, if you knew it (which I don't)

Now, you see, you have made several changes. First, you don't use an APL, but figure a party EL. Next, you changed the Girallons CR (which probably needed it). Then you figure an EL of 15, double the CR of the creature in question. Standard EL calculation would be something more like 7+2+2, or 11. EL 11 vs APL 5 party means that the PCs should run, or at least be very careful. I might run the combat, but I would be very careful with a contingency plan if the PCs couldn't get out.

Well when it gets published in Dragon magazine we will really see the proverbial hitting the fan.

Let me know if you do get published. This sounds like it can be useful to some people at least.

I'm curious are you going to adopt 3.5 Edition when it arrives?

Yes. Some CRs should be adjusted in general, so I don't have to change them every time I use the creature.

I suppose thats fair enough.

As I said, I don't even think Epic games should be run like non-Epic games. But I will leave it to those that run Epic games. Epic rules are an add-on to the system in any event.

 

[LokiDR]

Please. If you read an "attitude" into the comment "umm, no", then you have more problems to worry about than a bucketload of therapy could solve.

I don't really care if Kreynolds is annoyed or not, but I am. Please stop posting messages like this, they serve no point.

 

[Storm Raven]

I don't really care if Kreynolds is annoyed or not, but I am. Please stop posting messages like this, they serve no point.

I don't post for your personal pleasure. Sorry.

 

[Pielorinho]

I don't really care if Kreynolds is annoyed or not, but I am. Please stop posting messages like this, they serve no point.

Word. I can totally sympathize with getting in a personal tiff with someone on the boards, but the best response is to not respond at all. Otherwise, you end up hijacking an interesting discussion.

If you must respond, that's what email is for.

Daniel
naturally the last he'll say on the subject.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi WizarDru mate!

Firstly a slight error on my part. I related the Winterwight CR incorrectly. It should actually be CR 40; not 52. That was a throwback to a previous incarnation of my rules wherein ability scores were factored...my mistake.

So that would mean:

40th-level party of 4-5 = EL +/-0
27th-level party of 4-5 = EL +2
20th-level party of 4-5 = EL +4 (50/50)
13th-level party of 4-5 = EL +6
10th-level party of 4-5 = EL +8

To reevaluate the situation then:

The encounter (for your group) would have represented an EL +2 to +3 encounter (depending again on how we rate the significance of their foreknowledge and preparation).

Meaning the PCs should have won, but probably with at least one casualty.

The original version of HotD doesn't, but the variant class "Shadowed of Pelor" does, which is what the player actually has. He's a 10th level version, which is why he's a lower-powered cleric than he'd prefer. However, he's specialized to deal with the undead.

Great prestige class for fighting Undead.

I didn't mention earlier because it would have required a lengthy explanation of the differences between the original version of the class and the one in use. Beyond that, a DC 35 Fort Save against an undead draining effect is not that hard to beat for an 18th level character. He has a reasonable chance of failure, but not a huge one.

I would have thought you were talking a 75% chance of failure, but I suppose the combination of buffing and having classes rigged for Fort Saves would have made that more like 50%.

I'm not sure what you mean. Standard 3.0 Mass Haste, and he was casting two spells a round.

Exactly, but its widely perceived that haste really unbalances the classes (as do heal/harm and polymorph); which is why they were the first spells to be changed by 3.5.

Probably because, for starters, you keep rounding down. Two of the PCs were 17th level, the rest were 18th.

Wouldn't make much difference in the grand scheme of things.

As for those epic attacks...they still miss when the characters are blinking or have similar items, as they did. Mirror images died in rapid succession, and several folks DID get blightfire....but when the combat only lasts five rounds in toto, it's not the big deal it could be.

I would anticipate any 18th-level (or weaker) character hit twice by the Winterwight would be dead*...unless of course they were immune to Blightfire.

*Within 5 rounds.

Except that the players knew nothing about the winterwight's abilities or makeup until AFTER the battle,

I would perhaps reduce the EL modifier to 1 in that case. Making it an EL +3 encounter.

Whether the inclusion of the 'Shadowed of Pelor' Prestige Class notably swung things is unknown (to me), so we won't factor it.

and when the first level 9 spell failed against his SR, they used their biggest guns first. Disintegrate was an extremely lucky break. I rolled a '1'. Had I rolled a 2 or greater, the entire combat might have gone the other way.

There you have it then.

But that's true of about fifty die rolls that night, so there you go. When something shrugs off your Meteor Swarm, Dominate Monster and Maximized, Empowered Sonic Ball and effectively says, "Is that all you got?", you work your way down to Disintegrate, right before you run.

Does Dominate Monster work on Undead? Or were they just trying anything at that point...?

By comparison, the self-same party, now 18th-19th level, encountered the Cathezar from "Bastion of Broken Souls". She ripped them a new one for a good chunk of the combat, before things went bad and she got out of dodge (eventually they'll learn to use Dimensional Anchor...although in the Cathezar's case, she has a cheap trick around that). She's only CR 21, according to the system, and she was much nastier. If she had a higher DR or SR like the winterwight had, I suspect she would have scored a TPK. She came much closer to doing so than the winterwight did.

I'm not familiar with Cathezar; what can you tell me about her?

All of which goes to show how CR is still, in my mind, going to remain an art, not a science.

Once in possession of all the facts my system is virtually infallible.

Both CR systems put the emphasis on the challenge, not the challengers. A ghast against a party of gnomish rogues could be a fast route to a TPK, while against a party of clerics, it's a speedbump.

Situational modifier.

The CR system simply cannot do more than approximate an encounter, as there are far too many proximate factors to consider.

While there are infinite possibilities I think most factors will eventually fall under about a dozen situational modifiers at best.

That said, the core CR system is more useful to me, as it gives me a quick solution.

My system gives me a quick solution.

Yours is clearly more precise, but it isn't quick

Well I would agree that it isn't as quick for anyone unfamiliar with it. But that goes without saying.

...and with my limited amount of prep time, I'll take speed over precision.

Thats fair enough, just be careful with the official rules if you plan to take things into epic territory.

I can only lead people to the water - I can't make them drink.