ECL and CR

[JoeGKushner]

While reading over the Liber Bestrius, I'm pondering some issues with ECL and character levels.

Now a character is a CR of his level. Fighter 4 = CR 4.

A fighter whose a monster with a CR of 2, like an Ogre, is CR 2 + Fighter Level or ECL + Fighter Level?

The numbers come out nowhere near the same. Any publisher been able to fix this insanity in the D20 rules?

 

[Monte At Home]

Insanity?

The numbers shouldn't be the same. A PC's level equivalent should not be the same as a challenge appropriate for a group of 4 characters of his level. It should be moderately higher.

CR measures the amount of a challenge an NPC represents.

ECL measures the level equivalent of a PC.

I can see where you'd get these two game mechanics confused, but they are really pretty different.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I know that the two numbers are different. However, what I'm seeing is some CR's based on ECL + Character Level in some books and CR + Character Level in other books. Which is the correct CR?

In addition, I'm positive that the ECL's as they stand now are often not sound. Even WoTC seems to acknowledge this with various ECLs floating around for different races at different ECLs.

Part of my problem is an ECL probably shouldn't be higher than a CR in some instances. If a figher 4th is a CR of 4, and a creature CR of 4 is an ECL of 6, wouldn't that be saying that this ECL of 6 is equal to a CR of 4? If Level = CR and ECL = Character Level, doesn't Level still equal CR?

I know a lot of this has to do with the hobgoblin of game balance but I still don't think it works. The troll fighter who'se 1st level 8th level ECL is going to get his tail beat by the 9th level fighter every time.

That math on this is wrong from the get go in my own opinion.

 

[Henrix]

The CR of a creature with levels shold be based on the creature's CR. Never on the ECL.
Thus it should be CR = Creature CR + Class Levels

There is no simple relationship between CR and ECL.

Many things that are hardly usable against PCs (like a Tanar'ri's ability to communicate telepathically), and thus give little or no effect on the creature's CR, would be highly usable for a PC, and should thus increase the ECL.

The same is true for monsters that has an ability usable at will. This generally means 'a couple of times, at most' for a monster (before it gets it's head bashed in by the PCs), but 'an awful lot of times' for a PC.

All in all, this makes the ECL generally higher than the CR.

(The reverse would hardly ever be true, however, as most things usable against the PCs' would probably be usefol to one of them.)

 

[Blacksad]

May I confuse you more?

My way:

for PC (i.e. standard array for abilities, and PC wealth) I do CR=ECL

for NPC (abilities 10 10 10 11 11 11, NPC wealth) I consider CR= base CR+Level

for though NPC (standard array, NPC wealth) CR=ECL.

Officialy: there is no CR for PC, and somehow in the FRCS they equal ECL with CR: drizzt is CR18 and ECL 18, but for most monster with class level in WotC magazines or adventures CR= base CR + Level though those monster keep the standard monster array 10 10 10 11 11 11 while when they equate ECL with CR the creature has the standard PC array.

 

[Monte At Home]

There's also the problem of PC level not being the equivalent of NPC level (mainly for equipment), so it matters whether you are talking about a PC's levels or NPC.

It's a complicated issue.

 

[jmucchiello]

Of course, the real problem with ECLs is that they aren't a part of the SRD so no one can write anything meaningful about them without IP problems.

Many things that are hardly usable against PCs (like a Tanar'ri's ability to communicate telepathically), and thus give little or no effect on the creature's CR, would be highly usable for a PC, and should thus increase the ECL.

I disagree with that thinking. ECL equals power just like CR does. Telepathy might eliminate those problems where you walk though a gate and meet people who don't speak Commmon, but it sure won't help you in a fight against something.

The real problem is that CR is not linear whereas everything else is. That's why you have monster templates that read "if base CR is 4 or less, template creature CR is unadjusted, if base CR is 5 to 10, template creature's CR is base CR + 1, etc." Is this caused by the XP table being linear? I don't know. And with the D20 license as it is, we don't have hundred's of writer's trying to find a better way to do it. And why do PCs need so much equipment to be "balanced" at their level? Shouldn't there be more inherent abilities?

This is one of the few things that really bug me about the game. Monsters aren't really playable because they don't start out at 1st level and grow in power. My first d20 book (I swear I'm going to self-publish soon or die trying) has a child purple worm in it. It may as well be a whole new monster since I had to guess at things like size, HD, abilities and make up a CR based on the new creature.

Anyway, I've hit too many tangents as it is.
Joe

 

[JoeGKushner]

There's also the problem of PC level not being the equivalent of NPC level (mainly for equipment), so it matters whether you are talking about a PC's levels or NPC.

It's a complicated issue.

I agree. One of the things I liked about 2nd ed, and 1st for the matter, was you could pretty much figure out a monster's worth through special abilities and hit dice based on the good old tables in the DMGs. Of course special races were always a little bit more of a problem.

 

[Monte At Home]

I agree. One of the things I liked about 2nd ed, and 1st for the matter, was you could pretty much figure out a monster's worth through special abilities and hit dice based on the good old tables in the DMGs.

Hmm. Well, OK.

I guess if I agreed that those tables did a good job, you'd have seen something like them in 3E.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Hmm. Well, OK.

I guess if I agreed that those tables did a good job, you'd have seen something like them in 3E.

I agree that there were problems with them. I personally enjoyed the first ed more then the 2nd ed. I was always bothered by the fact that a creature with X amount of hit point was worth the same as Y unless you adjusted it yourself. However, these were tools that provided the GM some ideas on how to build a monster and how "powerful" it was. The rules in the old Dragon magazine on building a monsters are great but ELCs and CLs are still an issue not really covered by that.

I'm hoping that Savage Species or a 3rd party product will help with this issue. I'm thinking about just taxing on an XP penalty for X amount of levels, depending on how powerful the race is.