Immortal's Handbook continuation thread continuation

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Anubis mate!

The thing is, UK, I have presented a middle-ground wherein you count any scores above and beyond the "normal" range in CR while ignoring anything within the "standard array". That is why I advocate adding racial modifiers to ability scores into CR.

True indeed, and that is one option.

However, that doesn't address the one issue I still have a problem with.

Namely that by not factoring Ability Scores for characters but factoring them for monsters creates a flawed dichotomy in the mechanic. The results of which are that all the monster CRs are (approx.) 15% wrong.

The alternative is to not factor Ability Scores at all which just seems somehow 'wrong'. I mean say two deities each decide to create a servitor using the CR factors. Both players end up with a monster equal to a Pit Fiend except one has all 40s to ability scores and the other has all 20s, yet they both somehow have the same CR and cost the same amount of worsip points to create ~ it doesn't seem right to me.

First, however, please explain your little weird ratings for CR where you mention one as (normal) and another as (difficult), as you just did with the Pit Fiend. That is nowhere in the rules, and you have not explained it in any way.

It has been explained indirectly.

If you remember the CR/EL relationship table, every doubling of CR represents an EL increase of +4.

Therefore halving the CR represents a decrease of +4 EL.

A difference of +4 EL represents the difference between a moderate encounter (where the party should soundly win using 20-25% of its resources) and a difficult one (which is a 50/50 encounter).

I use the terminology to focus peoples attentions on the fact that at their actual CRs monsters are not meant to represent significant threats - but at the difficult rating they are.

Beyond that, I would say that we can get away with taking ability scores out of the picture altogether. If anything, it'll lower most monster CRs while keeping PCs roughly the same.

Possibly.

At any given time in the first 40 levels, standard PCs won't get more than +3 for their ability scores, and even then it won't be until the higher levels anyway.

I anticipate that characters would approximately gain +1 CR (for Ability Scores) with an additional +1 CR for every 10 levels (counting inherant bonuses and eventually epic feats).

The system balances itself out, as I believe the lower-rated Pit Fiend you gave is far more accurate if not still overrated. I would rate Pit Fiends at CR 20-22 AT MOST for a "normal" encounter that takes 20% of the party's resources.

I agree. The lower rated Pit Fiend is far more accurate provided we are not factoring ability scores for PCs.

Anyway, it should work either way.

You summed it up exactly!

It should.

But do we risk months of work on a hunch without testing it as best we can...? No, of course not. Thats why we are here.

Count racial bonuses or don't count anything at all, I believe it still works in playtesting.

It will almost certainly still work either way (my CR/EL relationship creates a very robust mechanic).

The problem is that one way (not counting Ability Scores) monster CRs just looks wrong.

Counting the ability scores obviously does NOT work in playtesting at low levels, though, so it should be removed if you want a universal system. Just try it out in a game. Make some characters and run them against some beasties and check your results. I have. We can get away with not counting ability scores.

The modifiers still work at low levels, but what they don't factor the fragility of very low level characters who are much more dependant on luck than relatively higher level characters.

For divinity, simply put, just add the ability scores into the divinity templates and leave it at that, because those ARE pretty hefty bonuses. We ain't talking no 10 or 20 above the norm there, we're talking about 90 above the norm hahaha!

Don't worry about the Divinity Templates they are perfect now. Though I have made a few changes recently like taking out the Inherant Bonuses to Ability Scores...though a deity can still gain them if they so wish - pun intended.

Anyway, I don't think the numbers look weird at all. Well they may LOOK weird, but in playtesting, those numbers without the ability socres work just fine.

Certainly on the surface yes I agree with you. But I am just wary of ignoring such bonuses.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Kolja mate!

*Quietly nods to self.*

Is that your Boba Fett (in Return of the Jedi) impression.

I have been the Paleolithic-brain during any one of these threads, continually playing catch-up in my posts. Upper_Krust certainly knows this from all the Email questions he answers for me. And yet, regardless of not always grasping how the whole system works (until recently anyways; still working on mixed challenge ratings mind you) I have diligently followed these threads from the beginning (including the Andy Collins debate).

The Challenge Ratings felt almost done a long time ago. And then the attributes were added. It was weird trying to tell my group of 1st players that the human telepath (with 12 Str, 14 Dex, 14 Con, 15 Int, 15 Wis, and 15 Cha) had the highest CR among them (barely weighing in at CR 4). It didn't seem right, but I took it on faith.

I have to say that it makes much more sense to drop the attribute modifiers altogether (or possibly include the imbalanced racial modifiers).

Currently I am tied on what to do. In the case of a metaphysical draw I would always go with the simplest option of course - which would mean removing ability scores as a general factor.

Everything seems to work seamlessly after that, much to Andy Collin's chagrin I'm sure.

I told him I could solve any problem he could forsee.

Never underestimate the powers of the Emperor...I mean Krust.

I think the upper level divinity issue can be solved another way, perhaps with "built-in" CR modifiers, perhaps not. I leave to Upper_Krust.

Yes thats how those work.

I want to see these Challenge Ratings redefine the game. This child needs to grow up and leave home. If I can offer this thread anything, it's my intuition. These rules are ready to go. They might stumble a few times, but they are more than well-equipped to learn from their own mistakes now.

This is indeed the final hurdle. Everything else is gospel.

 

[Anubis]

Namely that by not factoring Ability Scores for characters but factoring them for monsters creates a flawed dichotomy in the mechanic. The results of which are that all the monster CRs are (approx.) 15% wrong.

Well, if you count racial ability score modifiers, if those PCs are playing monster classes, those racial modifiers would indeed be counted for the PCs. That's part of the ECL actually, if you equate CR and ECL as it should be.

The alternative is to not factor Ability Scores at all which just seems somehow 'wrong'. I mean say two deities each decide to create a servitor using the CR factors. Both players end up with a monster equal to a Pit Fiend except one has all 40s to ability scores and the other has all 20s, yet they both somehow have the same CR and cost the same amount of worsip points to create ~ it doesn't seem right to me.

Again, this is solved by factoring in racial ability scores modifiers in CR and ECL. PCs get hit by racial ability score modifiers as well. The thing is, most PCs won't have racial ability score modifiers unless they play monsters.

If you remember the CR/EL relationship table, every doubling of CR represents an EL increase of +4.

Therefore halving the CR represents a decrease of +4 EL.

A difference of +4 EL represents the difference between a moderate encounter (where the party should soundly win using 20-25% of its resources) and a difficult one (which is a 50/50 encounter).

I still disagree with this part of the system as well, but I wanna take care of the ability score thing before hitting on that.

This is indeed the final hurdle. Everything else is gospel.

Well, spell-like abilities still need work (as you still overrate them terribly), and the relationship between CR and EL needs to be addressed (I pointed out how it breaks down at the extreme high levels due to your underestimating levels quickly by lowering their worth too quickly, and I showed how you could fix that).

I simply don't believe CR*2 = EL+4. There is pretty much no evidence to really support this. I still advocate the following table:

[COLOR=red]
CR - EL
=============
1           1
2           5
3           7
4           8
5           9
6          10
7          11
8          12
9          13
10         14
11         15
12-13      16
14-15      17
16-17      18
18-19      19
20-21      20

22-40    +1/2
41-80    +1/4
81-160   +1/8
ETC ETC ETC
[/COLOR]

If nothing else, this table has more accuracy and is MUCH simpler to use. Basically, there is no formula relating CR to EL until after Level 20, at which time it is CR*2 = EL+10. I think this is more accurate than CR*2 = EL+4, and this is easy to see at the extreme high levels. Yeah, I'm talking like Level 1000+ here.

Hey, YOU'RE the one who wants a system that works at ALL levels. This is how you do it, seriously. Yes, the core system overestimated levels, but you are underestimating the extreme high levels.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Anubis mate!

Well, if you count racial ability score modifiers, if those PCs are playing monster classes, those racial modifiers would indeed be counted for the PCs. That's part of the ECL actually, if you equate CR and ECL as it should be.

Yes but obviously that doesn't solve the dilemma. You are still left with the 10-15% CR discrepancy between characters and monsters.

Again, this is solved by factoring in racial ability scores modifiers in CR and ECL. PCs get hit by racial ability score modifiers as well. The thing is, most PCs won't have racial ability score modifiers unless they play monsters.

See above.

I still disagree with this part of the system as well, but I wanna take care of the ability score thing before hitting on that.

Don't. Its right.

Well, spell-like abilities still need work (as you still overrate them terribly),

I think they are as accurate as they can be.

Obviously 'always active' and 'at will' abilities are more powerful than 1/day abilities.

In fact I will post the Spell-like abilities now and throw this one open to gauge opinion:

SPELL-LIKE ABILITIES

CR +0.2/highest spell level effect (base)

To determine the effective level of an Epic Spell take its spellcraft DC; subract 20; divide by 10 (rounding fractions) and then add 9 to the total.

eg. Hellball: DC 90 -20 = 70 - 10 = 7 + 9 = 16
Hellball is therefore equal to a 16th-level spell

Individual Abilities:

‘Always Active’
CR +0.05/(spell level effect x caster level)

‘Usable At Will’
CR +0.025/(spell level effect x caster level)

‘Usable 1/day*’
CR +0.005/(spell level effect x caster level)
*Each use represents +0.005 up to five maximum which is treated the same as At Will.

eg. Solar
Highest spell level effect 9th (Wish) = CR +1.8
11 Always active spell levels x 20 (level) = CR +1.1
63 Usable At Will spell levels x 20 (level) = CR +3.15
24 Usable 3/day spell levels x 20 (level) = CR +0.72
65 Usable 1/day spell levels x 20 (level) = CR +0.65
Total = CR +7.42

In contrast 20 Integrated Wizard Levels would rate CR +7; 20 Integrated Cleric Levels would rate CR +6.

One flexible element may be the base CR +0.2/spell level. The reason this is included is so that you can't give low powered monsters simply Meteor Swarm at will and not have it impact CR.

However, if we adhere strictly to the (new) design parameters section of the CR document then monsters shouldn't have access to spells beyond their HD as spellcasters.

So it may be possible to remove that base figure, but I'll have to stress that should you give low powered monsters access to spells beyond spellcaster capabilities of the same measure it could lead to problems.

So the above Solar SLA could be CR +5.62 instead.

and the relationship between CR and EL needs to be addressed (I pointed out how it breaks down at the extreme high levels due to your underestimating levels quickly by lowering their worth too quickly, and I showed how you could fix that).

I simply don't believe CR*2 = EL+4. There is pretty much no evidence to really support this. I still advocate the following table:

[COLOR=red]
CR - EL
=============
1           1
2           5
3           7
4           8
5           9
6          10
7          11
8          12
9          13
10         14
11         15
12-13      16
14-15      17
16-17      18
18-19      19
20-21      20

22-40    +1/2
41-80    +1/4
81-160   +1/8
ETC ETC ETC
[/COLOR]

If nothing else, this table has more accuracy and is MUCH simpler to use.

How the heck is it much simpler when the current table is relative!?

Also I don't believe it is more accurate, in fact it is clearly incorrect:

By the above system a party of 4-5 22nd-level characters should not even challenge a 40th-level NPC. Yet I attest that they would have at least a 50% chance of success.

Basically, there is no formula relating CR to EL until after Level 20, at which time it is CR*2 = EL+10.

There is.

I think this is more accurate than CR*2 = EL+4, and this is easy to see at the extreme high levels. Yeah, I'm talking like Level 1000+ here.

I wouldn't worry too much about Level 1000+ if I were you.

Hey, YOU'RE the one who wants a system that works at ALL levels. This is how you do it, seriously. Yes, the core system overestimated levels, but you are underestimating the extreme high levels.

Thats not what the evidence suggests.

 

[Anubis]

Yet by your system as it stands now, a Level 3000 character could challenge a Level 6000 character. That is as laughable as a Level 1 character dueling a Solar and winning. Also, I do believe a Level 40 character would mop the floor with a Level 20 party. I've seen it happen. Note Level 20 badass party v. Barubary. They had NO chance.

If you do not recall Barubary, simply look back at my "Meet Barubary" thread. I rated him at CR 43, and he demolished a Level 20 party (that also summoned a 40 HD Solar, btw) EFFORTLESSLY (including said Solar, thanks to Devastating Critical).

If you would like to debate this example, simply post on the "Meet Barubary" thread and we'll hash this part out over there.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Anubis mate!

Yet by your system as it stands now, a Level 3000 character could challenge a Level 6000 character.

Absolutely.

At that measure of power the number of one hit kill options and effects of specialisation (in whatever field) reduce the effectiveness of leveling.

That is as laughable as a Level 1 character dueling a Solar and winning.

No its about the same as a single 25th-level character dueling a Solar.

Also, I do believe a Level 40 character would mop the floor with a Level 20 party. I've seen it happen.

I don't agree - I see that as a 50/50 encounter.

Note Level 20 badass party v. Barubary. They had NO chance.

If you do not recall Barubary, simply look back at my "Meet Barubary" thread. I rated him at CR 43, and he demolished a Level 20 party (that also summoned a 40 HD Solar, btw) EFFORTLESSLY (including said Solar, thanks to Devastating Critical).

If you would like to debate this example, simply post on the "Meet Barubary" thread and we'll hash this part out over there.

I would like to debate it - I am totally guaranteeing that Barubary does not rate at CR 43 as you attest.

However I can neither remember his stats nor find the thread in question, so if you would care to provide a link or repost his stats we can get down to business.

 

[Clay_More]

Hey UK. I actually had a minor continuation of the discussion of Outsiders & Undead in the Necromancy thingy thread.

I really wish you would divulge a little information on how exactly you intend to explain the intrusion of necromancy on deities... And is it possible to get a little e-mail sent sneak preview of the undead templates (please, please, please)....

I am still doing some work-schedule research, trying to get enough open time for the GenCon. After having made attempts to come for two years in a row, I am really "obsessed" with getting things to fall in place.

So, you did notice that it appears that "moi" is getting to write a book myself as well?
I still think its pretty amazing that I might get a book out there, which kinda made me think, is IH the first book that you are making entirely for yourself?

 

[Dark Wolf 97]

Hello guys,

Serge, myself and others are attempting to throw together a template for The Slaad Lords at Dicefreaks, and I know your all creative, smart people, so, your invited!

http://www.dicefreaks.com

Oh and U_K whats you position on Outsider Lords (Demon, Devil, Celestial, Yugoloth, Elemental, Slaad, Modrons, and perhaps Seelie and Unseelie stuff) ? Are there gonna be any in the IH? I'd really like to see your version of Demogorgon. In fact if there are any Demons in IH I'll be very happy (their my favorite, and a focus IMC).

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Clay_More mate!

Hey UK. I actually had a minor continuation of the discussion of Outsiders & Undead in the Necromancy thingy thread.

I know, I have been following it when I can.

I really wish you would divulge a little information on how exactly you intend to explain the intrusion of necromancy on deities...

Essentially it deals with the difference between soul and spirit...and thats all I am saying on the matter.

And is it possible to get a little e-mail sent sneak preview of the undead templates (please, please, please)....

No!

Was it you I told about the Vivisect Template? Wherein the undead is built of body parts from owners slain by various magic weapons, and in turn imbued with those properties.

You know of course that the various monsters are in the 3rd section of the IH, not the first section I will have at Gencon UK?

I am still doing some work-schedule research, trying to get enough open time for the GenCon. After having made attempts to come for two years in a row, I am really "obsessed" with getting things to fall in place.

Well it will be great to meet you mate, should you happen to make it!

So, you did notice that it appears that "moi" is getting to write a book myself as well?

I did indeed, with Ambient, congratulations mate!

I still think its pretty amazing that I might get a book out there, which kinda made me think, is IH the first book that you are making entirely for yourself?

Yes, the IH, though not my first published work, is the first book I have designed and written all myself. I'm still pretty excited about the whole thing even if it has been on hold for the past year almost.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hello guys,

Hey Dark Wolf mate!

Serge, myself and others are attempting to throw together a template for The Slaad Lords at Dicefreaks, and I know your all creative, smart people, so, your invited!

http://www.dicefreaks.com

Great site. I visit there a few times a week, even if I haven't posted much of late.

Serge and I handle a few things differently, essentially he still operates wholly within the framework of D&Dg...and I don't. Hopefully when he gets the IH I can change his mind on that, or at least give him an alternative that presents some interesting ideas.

Oh and U_K whats your position on Outsider Lords (Demon, Devil, Celestial, Yugoloth, Elemental, Slaad, Modrons, and perhaps Seelie and Unseelie stuff)?

Left of centre.

Are there gonna be any in the IH?

Yes.

I'd really like to see your version of Demogorgon.

Unfortunately while the name Demogorgon is freely available, the concept of two mandrill heads and tentacles (etc.) is not, and since in my estimation that 'is' what Demogorgon looks like his presence won't grace the IH.

That said, Asmodeus may find his way into the book, I'm still pondering on whether to include him now or save him for a near future product.

On a different note I still haven't got my hands on the Book of Vile Darkness though I did by chance come across the art gallery for the book on wizards website and I must admit Demogorgons picture is utterly rubbish. In fact the art in that book (particularly the Demon Princes and Archdevils) was atrocious...a few peices aside (Bel, Mammon, Mephisto, Yeenoghu and possibly Orcus). I mean they paid absolutely no respect to what has gone before, the creatures bear no resemblance to earlier iterations and in my opinion suffer badly because of it.

In fact if there are any Demons in IH I'll be very happy (their my favorite, and a focus IMC).

The problem with Demons/Devils et al is that they have a clearly defined hierarchy in 3rd Ed. Thats something I would rather expand upon than upset.

As such there is not much you can do without eventually encroaching on that hierarchy.

eg. By that I mean you can't have lots of new non-unique intelligent, powerful demon types running around because we know that the Balor is the big boy on the block and above those sit Demon Lords and the rest.

However, there are a few cards you can still play without upsetting the applecart as it were (if you'll excuse the mixed metaphor).