How much effect on ECL should Fast Healing have?

[RangerWickett]

Re: About FCTF.

Hi Ryan mate!

Out of curiousity what other powers are rated in FCTF equal to Fast Healing (its difficult to judge without knowing a few others to rate it against)?

Well, a lot of the powers are scalable, but I'll see what some examples might be.

For a PC or prominent NPC, fast healing 1 costs 9 HrPs. What else costs 9 HrPs? Well, bear in mind that these are all only available at 6th level, a time when D&D characters have fireballs, whirlwind attacks, and usually at least +1 magic weapons.

• +6 bonus to Constitution.
• A Close-range (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels) energy blast that does 4d6 damage, usable once per round.
• Ability to Fly without wings, at poor manueverability, at a speed of 40 ft.
• The ability to convert 2 points of real damage into subdual damage with a touch, once per round.
• A +5 bonus to attack rolls (but not base attack bonus).
• A +9 bonus to all Reflex saves (or pick all Fort, or all Will, but only one of them).
• A +8 bonus to all damage rolls with one chosen type of physical attack.
• DR 7/+1.
• A +18 bonus to Listen checks.
• The ability to go into a Barbarian-style rage at will (but still only once per encounter).
• The ability to create a force shield (as the shield spell, +7 bonus to AC from one 180-degree arc) at will. You can only have one at a time, but it moves with you.
• A +40 bonus to Jump checks.
• The ability to telepathically communicate with anyone you are aware of, out to Long range (400 ft. + 40 ft./level). You can only communicate with one person at a time.
• The ability to teleport 45 ft as a standard action, to a location you can see.

These are all costs for PCs. For monsters and minor NPCs, some things are a lot cheaper. Fast healing 1 costs 5 HrPs for NPCs, and for the same price you can get DR 7/+1, or teleport up to 500 ft. with no chance of failure, or a ton of immunities (critical hits, poison, disease, stunning, and subdual damage; known as the 'undead immunity package').

 

[CRGreathouse]

I can see I am going to have to work on my terminology; using the same terms to describe different (though similar and related) ideas is whats attributing to the confusion herein.

My choice of terminology was intentional. I don't want to know how well your system works within itself when it redefines the CRs (because I already know this), but how well it meshes with the existing system.

The official Challenge Rating system becomes less and less accurate the higher above CR20 you ascend! It doesn't balance to level and it doesn't balance to numbers of opponents.

This I have problems with. I think that CRs above 20 in the ELH are fine, except that numbers (x2 = +2) don't work directly any more. That is, I think most CR X monsters in the ELH are a good challenge for level (or standard ECL) X.

My system solves these problems - but you have to convert BOTH the monsters AND the PCs for it to work.

My point with the Epic Rules was that many of the monsters are close to the modified challenge rating I would assign anyway; so they could be used 'as is'. However the PCs would still need to be modified.

A Phaethon is roughly equivalent to a 62nd-level character - its modified challenge rating is 35. A 44th-level character has a modified challenge rating of 31. Therefore x4 44th-level characters are equal to a Phaethon.

I'm confused. Now you're saying the system are incompatible!

Sorry for the below terminology, but it's needed because of all the redefinition going on.

A wotcCR 34 creature is a challenge for 4 wotcECL 34 creatures. The same wotcCR 34 creatur is ukECL 62 and ukCR 31, which is a challenge for 4 44th level characters. A challenge for 4 44th level characters is wotcCR 44, not 34!

 

[Anubis]

This I have problems with. I think that CRs above 20 in the ELH are fine, except that numbers (x2 = +2) don't work directly any more. That is, I think most CR X monsters in the ELH are a good challenge for level (or standard ECL) X.

Using that, we can easily prove that the core system falls apart. Go ahead and create four Level 66 PCs and pit them against the CR 66 Great Wyrm Prismatic Dragon. I GUARANTEE that the PCs' chances of winning are just about ZERO. The ONLY way the PCs would win would be if one of them attacked normally and rolled three 20s in a row for instant death, as per the optional rule in the DMG. (I say they need three 20s because any Level 66 character would need 20s to hit AC 106.) Try it out for yourself. There is NO CHANCE the PCs would win, much less using only 20% of their resources as the core rules would suggest.

By the new system, a Great Wyrm Primatic Dragon is about ECL 125.2, or CR 45. That makes one a challenge for four PCs of Levels 120-127. Test this one out, and you'll quickly see that this works MUCH better.

Like we said, the core system simply doesn't work.

 

[CRGreathouse]

Using that, we can easily prove that the core system falls apart. Go ahead and create four Level 66 PCs and pit them against the CR 66 Great Wyrm Prismatic Dragon. I GUARANTEE that the PCs' chances of winning are just about ZERO. The ONLY way the PCs would win would be if one of them attacked normally and rolled three 20s in a row for instant death, as per the optional rule in the DMG. (I say they need three 20s because any Level 66 character would need 20s to hit AC 106.) Try it out for yourself. There is NO CHANCE the PCs would win, much less using only 20% of their resources as the core rules would suggest.

I don't claim that every CR is accurate, but I'm willing to test this to see if it's close. Give me some time, though; I'm far too busy to even create the characters at the moment. I'll get back to you in a week or so.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Re: About FCTF.

Hi Ryan mate!

Well, a lot of the powers are scalable, but I'll see what some examples might be.

For a PC or prominent NPC, fast healing 1 costs 9 HrPs. What else costs 9 HrPs? Well, bear in mind that these are all only available at 6th level, a time when D&D characters have fireballs, whirlwind attacks, and usually at least +1 magic weapons.

• +6 bonus to Constitution.
• A Close-range (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels) energy blast that does 4d6 damage, usable once per round.
• Ability to Fly without wings, at poor manueverability, at a speed of 40 ft.
• The ability to convert 2 points of real damage into subdual damage with a touch, once per round.
• A +5 bonus to attack rolls (but not base attack bonus).
• A +9 bonus to all Reflex saves (or pick all Fort, or all Will, but only one of them).
• A +8 bonus to all damage rolls with one chosen type of physical attack.
• DR 7/+1.
• A +18 bonus to Listen checks.
• The ability to go into a Barbarian-style rage at will (but still only once per encounter).
• The ability to create a force shield (as the shield spell, +7 bonus to AC from one 180-degree arc) at will. You can only have one at a time, but it moves with you.
• A +40 bonus to Jump checks.
• The ability to telepathically communicate with anyone you are aware of, out to Long range (400 ft. + 40 ft./level). You can only communicate with one person at a time.
• The ability to teleport 45 ft as a standard action, to a location you can see.

These are all costs for PCs. For monsters and minor NPCs, some things are a lot cheaper. Fast healing 1 costs 5 HrPs for NPCs, and for the same price you can get DR 7/+1, or teleport up to 500 ft. with no chance of failure, or a ton of immunities (critical hits, poison, disease, stunning, and subdual damage; known as the 'undead immunity package').

Some interesting ideas.

I'm curious. Did you perceive a reworking of abilities for NPCs could only be done at an individual level (rather than an across the board flat reduction)?

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi CRGreathouse mate!

My choice of terminology was intentional. I don't want to know how well your system works within itself when it redefines the CRs (because I already know this), but how well it meshes with the existing system.

The existing system simply doesn't work the higher you ascend in epic levels.

- It doesn't work under the CR+8/-8 threat range.

- It doesn't work when you multiply/divide the number of opponents.

- It doesn't work consistent to effective character levels.

Excerpt from the WotC Epic Handbook Chat Night
josh_kablack: As much as I like the book overall, I have a few concerns. One of the big issues seems to be whether the epic monsters have appropriate challenge ratings. Do you have any insights from playtesting about this?

Andy: The CRs for epic monsters are based on our "best guesses," which are in turn derived from playtesting and general experience with the rules themselves. It's all but impossible to "nail down" a CR at that level because of the widely diverging powers and abilities of characters.

Bruce: However, we're fairly happy with the CRs for critters under CR 30. We had a pretty good handle on playtesting and methods of assigning CR. Creatures higher than that get to be more complicated and can certainly be thought of as part of a range.

So epic monsters are their best guesses; and they are unhappy with CRs above 30.

Not exactly brimming with confidence. Not to mention in detailing Immortals; CRs above 30 are going to be de rigeur. You need something that are going to give consistent results at ANY measure of power.

I think that CRs above 20 in the ELH are fine,

I would say that most of them won't get you into trouble.

except that numbers (x2 = +2) don't work directly any more.

That much is obvious.

That is, I think most CR X monsters in the ELH are a good challenge for level (or standard ECL) X.

Be careful with a few of them - especially the Templates!

I'm confused. Now you're saying the system are incompatible!

Their system doesn't work. Yet some of their results are close enough to mine so as to be compatible; if used as is.

Sorry for the below terminology, but it's needed because of all the redefinition going on.

Thats okay mate, I know what you mean.

A wotcCR 34 creature is a challenge for 4 wotcECL 34 creatures.

A challenge which the PCs should defeat using (approx.) 25% of their resources.

The same wotcCR 34 creature is ukECL 62 and ukCR 31, which is a challenge for 4 44th level characters.

Again a challenge which the PCs should defeat using (approx.) 25% of their resources.

Incidently the Character levels could be 44th-47th here with no noticeable impact on the CR.

A challenge for 4 44th level characters is wotcCR 44, not 34!

Exactly. I doubt the Phaethon would be defeated by 4 34th-level characters (50/50 chance as I see it) let alone defeated using a mere 25% of the parties resources.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Anubis mate!

Using that, we can easily prove that the core system falls apart. Go ahead and create four Level 66 PCs and pit them against the CR 66 Great Wyrm Prismatic Dragon. I GUARANTEE that the PCs' chances of winning are just about ZERO. The ONLY way the PCs would win would be if one of them attacked normally and rolled three 20s in a row for instant death, as per the optional rule in the DMG. (I say they need three 20s because any Level 66 character would need 20s to hit AC 106.) Try it out for yourself. There is NO CHANCE the PCs would win, much less using only 20% of their resources as the core rules would suggest.

By the new system, a Great Wyrm Primatic Dragon is about ECL 125.2, or CR 45. That makes one a challenge for four PCs of Levels 120-127. Test this one out, and you'll quickly see that this works MUCH better.

Like we said, the core system simply doesn't work.

As I see it the Great Wyrm Prismatic Dragon is (approx.) ukECL 100 = ukCR 42. A party of 4 72nd-75th level PCs will have a 50/50 chance against it.

I think a party of 66th-level PCs (as WotC suggest) could defeat it. Extrapolating the WotC wealth tables gets us approx 140.8 million GP at 66th-level (35 million gp primary item and three 14 million gp secondary items). So they could plausibly possess weapons/items that would injure the monster.

 

[RangerWickett]

Re: Re: About FCTF.

Hi Ryan mate!



Some interesting ideas.

I'm curious. Did you perceive a reworking of abilities for NPCs could only be done at an individual level (rather than an across the board flat reduction)?

If you're asking what I think you're asking . . .

The PC/NPC variation in power costs was determined separately for each power. There was no pre-set formula, since there are too many variables to say that all powers will always be worth x% as much for NPCs.

The way we wrangled stuff was to take fantasy D20 as a base, and calculate costs based on how powerful PCs and NPCs/monsters were at various levels. After all, super powers are basically just magic with different explanations, so the power progression scale works fine for either genre.

For a lot of things, we looked at the types of powers different monsters of different CRs had, and tried to come up with costs based on that. Abilities that are really useful for PCs just might be practically useless for monsters. I mean, really, how often do PCs try to poison their foes? Immunity to poison is much cheaper for NPCs than for PCs.

But no, there was no set formula.

 

[Anubis]

I think a party of 66th-level PCs (as WotC suggest) could defeat it. Extrapolating the WotC wealth tables gets us approx 140.8 million GP at 66th-level (35 million gp primary item and three 14 million gp secondary items). So they could plausibly possess weapons/items that would injure the monster.

Haven't we already gone over this? You CAN'T keep adding gains as you get to higher levels. Extrapolating the SAME number, a Level 115 character will have over 800,000,000 gp in wealth, and as I have already proven, that simply does NOT work no matter how you look at it. Using those numbers, a single Level 115 character could splat most deities and just about anything you could throw at him.

The gains after Level 40 must be arithmatic, or the system breaks down almost instantly. Using the PROPER formula, a Level 66 character would only have a little over 22,000,000 wealth. This is how you balance things.

The reason it breaks down is because the levels aren't worth as much. If you combine your wealth system with your ECL system, you break the whole thing all over again. For example, the Level 160 character (CR 50) will have a wealth of 3,276,800,000. A Level 191 character (also CR 50) will have a wealth of 6,654,316,805. I'm sorry, but the Level 160 character would have NO CHANCE of winning that battle. No way, no how. (You can't just say "you have no way of getting that item", otherwise wealth becomes worthless. The wealth is wealth, and by the rules, they can spend it as they like, as per the guidelines in the ELH.) By my system, the wealths would be 53,404,840 and 63,687,757, respectively. This balances things out MUCH better, not only by putting the wealths closer together to be reasonable, but also by making getting super-expensive items impossible, as it should be, and without using DM discretion or Rule 0!

Like I said, if it ain't an arithmatic progression, it simply WON'T work. Just use this to test it . . . You say a Great Wyrm Primatic Dragon is ECL 100, fine, work with that. Could we agree that a single Level 100 character should have almost no chance against the thing? If so, create two Level 100 characters, one using my wealth calculations, and one using yours. I can GUARANTEE that the one using your proposed wealth tables would splat that Great Wyrm Prismatic Dragon without a problem. Using my wealth system, you'll find that the challenge level is as it should be.

Basically, you MUST cut off actually gains after Level 40, otherwise it will eventually break down every time.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Anubis mate!

Haven't we already gone over this?

Sorry mom!

You CAN'T keep adding gains as you get to higher levels.

I was using the example to justify WotCs Challenge Ratings.

Extrapolating the SAME number, a Level 115 character will have over 800,000,000 gp in wealth, and as I have already proven, that simply does NOT work no matter how you look at it.

Actually as far as I can tell its about 1.5 billion at 115th-level.

I have been giving this whole idea some thought and to be honest its not the wealth thats the problem but rather the 'converting wealth into items' aspect.

Using those numbers, a single Level 115 character could splat most deities and just about anything you could throw at him.

I love how you make these sweeping generalisations!

The gains after Level 40 must be arithmatic, or the system breaks down almost instantly.

Using the PROPER formula, a Level 66 character would only have a little over 22,000,000 wealth. This is how you balance things.

The reason it breaks down is because the levels aren't worth as much.

...I wonder who discovered that?

If you combine your wealth system with your ECL system, you break the whole thing all over again. For example, the Level 160 character (CR 50) will have a wealth of 3,276,800,000. A Level 191 character (also CR 50) will have a wealth of 6,654,316,805. I'm sorry, but the Level 160 character would have NO CHANCE of winning that battle. No way, no how.

Well actually its CR51 at 176th-level; CR52 at 192nd.

(You can't just say "you have no way of getting that item",

I can and I will.

No matter how much money Bill Gates has he can't build a Time Machine.

otherwise wealth becomes worthless.

No it doesn't!

The wealth is wealth, and by the rules, they can spend it as they like, as per the guidelines in the ELH.) By my system, the wealths would be 53,404,840 and 63,687,757, respectively. This balances things out MUCH better, not only by putting the wealths closer together to be reasonable, but also by making getting super-expensive items impossible, as it should be, and without using DM discretion or Rule 0!

Well I think I am favouring the opposite route. You don't need to curtail wealth; but items are not fashioned out of wealth alone, they take knowledge; time and energy.

You don't simply traipse down to 'Artifacts R' Us'!

Like I said, if it ain't an arithmatic progression, it simply WON'T work. Just use this to test it . . . You say a Great Wyrm Primatic Dragon is ECL 100, fine, work with that. Could we agree that a single Level 100 character should have almost no chance against the thing?

They would have a 50/50 chance...hence the ECL 100.

If so, create two Level 100 characters, one using my wealth calculations, and one using yours. I can GUARANTEE that the one using your proposed wealth tables would splat that Great Wyrm Prismatic Dragon without a problem. Using my wealth system, you'll find that the challenge level is as it should be.

I don't need to, as I explained its the items that need limiting.