Iron Lore: Malhavoc's Surprise?

[Wulf Ratbane]

I think it would be pretty hard for a Gorgon to wipe out anything other than a low level or under-manned party in a single round. There are plenty of ways to mitigate gaze attacks, particularly at 8th level.

We're not talking the Gorgon of classical mythology (ie, medusa).

We're talking the gorgon of D&D-- the big stone (iron?) bull that breathes petrifying gas in a 60' cone, once every 1d4 rounds (DC19).

An 8th level fighter has, I think, +6 to his save, meaning he survives 65% of the time, nothwithstanding magical resistance bonuses, feats, Con bonus, or action points.

If you assume as little as a +2 save bonus with all factors combined, you're up to 75%, which means that (worst case) 1 in 4 fighters is dead on the first round, leaving the others to kill the gorgon in 2.5 rounds or less before, on average, he breathes again.

An 8th level fighter with a +3 Str bonus and a +2 weapon (we'll assume the ubiquitous longsword, though any 1d8 weapon is fair game) vs. AC 20 deals an average of 10.925 damage per round, for a total damage output from all three fighters in 2.5 rounds of 81.9375 damage.

A gorgon has 85 hit points.

Now when you go back and factor in whether or not the fighters actually beat the gorgon's initiative on the first round, you can see just how close the fight is... ON AVERAGE.

 

[Celebrim]

I agree there are ways... provided you know about the threat beforehand. Open door, see medusa, make your saves. In enough encounters, you'll eventually find those where everyone rolls poorly.

But this is certainly true even in a default D&D game, and in fact its the save or die effects which are one of the reasons high level play gets problimatic.

I for one think that at high levels, PC's could benefit from more 'rerolls'. Seeing as Mearls has given IH PC's advanced armor class, and the benifits of DR, you'd think that this would be a far more satisfying solution to the problem of 'save or die' situations. And for that matter, Green Ronin's shaman class has the beginning of a potentially interesting take on removing negative states from PC's which could be (with care) integrated into a low magic setting without the need for instantaneous clerical healing.

 

[A'koss]

I'm not trying to kid anyone, and rather than get involved in an adversarial discussion with you (especially since my guess is you have no intention of actually trying to understand), I'll just appeal to authority and state that I know what I'm talking about, and you don't.

Okay, let's back up a for a minute. I'll take it down a notch, I promise.

Some of your comments in this thread came across as... "sour grape-ish" if you will, and this just seemed particularly "out there", at least on the surface. I was part of the initial playtest for 3e - it was stated at the outset that CR determination was more an art than a science. At low levels the CR system works pretty well, but slowly goes awry at higher levels until you can have various PC groups taking on critters 10 or more CRs greater than they should, or falling to particular lower CR monsters who are more dangerous than they may first appear. However, since you say you have some further insight on this topic, you've piqued my interest. If you wish to share, please do.

 

[A'koss]

But this is certainly true even in a default D&D game, and in fact its the save or die effects which are one of the reasons high level play gets problimatic.

I for one think that at high levels, PC's could benefit from more 'rerolls'. Seeing as Mearls has given IH PC's advanced armor class, and the benifits of DR, you'd think that this would be a far more satisfying solution to the problem of 'save or die' situations. And for that matter, Green Ronin's shaman class has the beginning of a potentially interesting take on removing negative states from PC's which could be (with care) integrated into a low magic setting without the need for instantaneous clerical healing.

How does the Shaman handle it?

Another way might simply to have more gradated effects - many Save or Die effects can just be boiled down to damage. In my low magic game I had used something called Resolve Points to deal with many of the other showstopping powers. Resolve was like Mental Hit Points+, including resisting Will Save Spells, Intimidation, Diplomacy, Energy Drain, Transmutation, Fear, Torture, Madness, powering metamagic, creating magic items and more by turning all of it into "Resolve Damage". If your Resolve hit 0, whatever effect brought you there then took hold.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Okay, let's back up a for a minute. I'll take it down a notch, I promise.

Fair enough.

Some of your comments in this thread came across as... "sour grape-ish" if you will,

A point I have acknowledged and am obviously still trying to overcome...

and this just seemed particularly "out there", at least on the surface.

It's not "out there" at all. I refer you back to my edit: It is a major part of Mike's own design process to address CR. Clearly he is intent on addressing the mechanics of CR.

His point is that CR should NOT be guesswork, and that he has some value to offer the gaming community in bringing the focus of his mind, and a scientific approach, to it.

I was part of the initial playtest for 3e - it was stated at the outset that CR determination was more an art than a science.

Determining CR is not an art. Determining whether a particular CR applies in all circumstances (particularly the circumstances of your own campaign), I will agree, IS an art. But CR is an absolute, it is a baseline; and it has to be, in order to be of any value to a DM at all.

CR cannot be determined due to the specifics of party makeup, tactical position, or the vagaries of countless campaigns.

At low levels the CR system works pretty well, but slowly goes awry at higher levels until you can have various PC groups taking on critters 10 or more CRs greater than they should, or falling to particular lower CR monsters who are more dangerous than they may first appear.

That's the fault of the EL system, not the CR system. The EL does not scale properly as character level and CR advance. It fails to address the exponential advance of power with respect to increasing CR. A CR2 creature is twice as powerful as a CR1 creature, but a CR20 creature is not twice as powerful as a CR19 creature. Yet, according to the EL system in the RAW, the relative power difference is equivalent. That's absurdly false on its face and obvious to anyone who has played high level D&D, as you seem to have noticed.

I disagree with your second point (low-CRs suddenly becoming a threat to high level PCs).

However, since you say you have some further insight on this topic, you've piqued my interest. If you wish to share, please do.

I'll refer you to a greater authority: Upper_Krust. Seek out his threads in the House Rules forum, and find a link for his Challenge Ratings document. Otherwise you can email me and I will send you what you need.


Wulf

 

[A'koss]

A point I have acknowledged and am obviously still trying to overcome...

I'm willing to extend a little slack here. But as a publisher... with a product competing in the same airspace... I'd be careful how I was perceived in a thread like this.

It's not "out there" at all. I refer you back to my edit: It is a major part of Mike's own design process to address CR. Clearly he is intent on addressing the mechanics of CR.

His point is that CR should NOT be guesswork, and that he has some value to offer the gaming community in bringing the focus of his mind, and a scientific approach, to it.

Mike's going to address the mechanics of CR in IH? Okay, I see where we may have had our wires crossed - could you point out where he says this? And here I thought I caught all the IH gossip...

Determining CR is not an art. Determining whether a particular CR applies in all circumstances (particularly the circumstances of your own campaign), I will agree, IS an art. But CR is an absolute, it is a baseline; and it has to be, in order to be of any value to a DM at all.

I can tell you right now there is little, if any, scientific method in WotC's CR determinations. They come with a baseline, then use playtesting with their iconics to get a rough placement.

Now, whether you *could* sit down and say flying is worth X, 5th level clerical casting ability is worth Y, a Rod of Lordy Might is worth Z and apply it to both characters and monsters you *could* come up with something. This is how Upper Krust is handling it, right? However, in practice...

That's the fault of the EL system, not the CR system. The EL does not scale properly as character level and CR advance. It fails to address the exponential advance of power with respect to increasing CR. A CR2 creature is twice as powerful as a CR1 creature, but a CR20 creature is not twice as powerful as a CR19 creature. Yet, according to the EL system in the RAW, the relative power difference is equivalent. That's absurdly false on its face and obvious to anyone who has played high level D&D, as you seem to have noticed.

The EL wonkiness is another matter yet...

I disagree with your second point (low-CRs suddenly becoming a threat to high level PCs).

Wait for the next HL adventuring thread to come up.

I'll refer you to a greater authority: Upper_Krust. Seek out his threads in the House Rules forum, and find a link for his Challenge Ratings document. Otherwise you can email me and I will send you what you need.

I know of it, and I've heard good things about it, but have any of the major publishers adopted it?

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I'm willing to extend a little slack here. But as a publisher... with a product competing in the same airspace... I'd be careful how I was perceived in a thread like this.

I'm sensitive on a personal level with respect to Mike, who is at the very least "a friend of a friend" that I would not want to offend.

I'm not going to comment further on another "competitor" comparison with respect to the marketplace.

I see Mike as a competitor as a game designer in that he is tackling a problem I have also struggled with, and I am waiting to see how he does it. So, yes, I'm feeling "competitive" in that respect-- but I still wouldn't say I'm any kind of competition for him.

Mike's going to address the mechanics of CR in IH? Okay, I see where we may have had our wires crossed - could you point out where he says this? And here I thought I caught all the IH gossip...

That Mike has made CR-compatibility a central feature of Iron Heroes is not news.

So although I think you're being deliberately obtuse, here you go:

http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=2097339&postcount=22
http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=2100444&postcount=88
http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=2104440&postcount=128
http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=2105513&postcount=138
http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=2119514&postcount=269


I would like to have checked out the design diary to give you a few more links, but unfortunately Malhavoc must be some kind of a threat to the government here: Blocked!

Wulf

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

We're not talking the Gorgon of classical mythology (ie, medusa).

We're talking the gorgon of D&D-- the big stone (iron?) bull that breathes petrifying gas in a 60' cone, once every 1d4 rounds (DC19).

Thank-you for the correction, I had it right in my head and by the time I got to my second sentence it was all out of whack.

 

[Capellan]

We're talking the gorgon of D&D-- the big stone (iron?) bull that breathes petrifying gas in a 60' cone, once every 1d4 rounds (DC19).

An 8th level fighter has, I think, +6 to his save, meaning he survives 65% of the time, nothwithstanding magical resistance bonuses, feats, Con bonus, or action points.

If you assume as little as a +2 save bonus with all factors combined, you're up to 75%, which means that (worst case) 1 in 4 fighters is dead on the first round

Your maths is off

+6 base save vs DC 19 = 13 or better to survive = 40% survival, increasing to 50% with a +2 bonus.

And poor-FORT characters are in real trouble (+2 base save = 20% survival rate, increasing to 30% if they have a +2 bonus).

That makes your analysis look a little flawed

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Your maths is off

It is indeed, feel free to rework it.