Need some perspective on ECL

[spunky_mutters]

I'm having a problem getting my head around a particular issue in determining ECLs for monster races, and since this is going to affect my next game, I need some help.

I know a lot of this has been discussed before, but I can't seem to find any opinions in previous threads to help me clear up my confusion.

The problem I'm having is buying into the whole method used by WotC in Savage Species. I need some convincing that the method they use has any merit or consistency.

My big issue is comparing ECLs given in Savage Species to that other method for determining relative power of a creature, the CR. CR should be equal to the character level of an NPC, according to the DMG. This would lead me to believe that ECL should pretty much be equal to CR for a monster race, and could in fact be used in place of ECL for races where it is provided. I am apparently erring in my understanding here.

A Stone Giant (CR 8) is a whopping ECL 18. If played from 1st level, the player will have a CR 8 character to show their efforts when everybody else in the party is really level 18. The shadow (CR 3 ) has been equated to a 10th level character, and so on.

I can understand that they are trying to balance two different ideas here (challenge against players in combat versus balance/exploitability of monster abilities by players), and that is probably the reason for these disparities. What I can't seem to get my head around is how both of these systems can work. It seems like one of them must be very wrong. How can something be equivalent to a 10th level character for character playing purposes (i.e. a Shadow who is being likened to a CR 10 character), and yet only be a CR 3 creature?

I can see where you might want to adjust monster CRs individually if you feel they are off, but it seems that the whole system is off if you need to scale character power separate from monster power.

Any thoughts?

 

[Kraedin]

The crux of the difference is that CRs are balanced for combat; level adjustments are balanced for the game as a whole.

To take the shadow example, incorporeality is useful in combat. However, incorporeality is very useful outside of combat. It is worth more to a player than it is to a monster, so it has a higher effect on level adjustment that CR.

However, a player shouldn't expect a shadow PC to really do anything other than take up space (so to speak) in combat; his strengths lie in infiltration and espionage.

 

[spunky_mutters]

I understand the different aims of the CR and ECL, but I don't understand how you can have both work. A character who puts 10 levels into shadow is going to suck compared to most other level 10 characters, and is definitely not getting much for their 10 levels of experience. They have a lot of weaknesses for all that they've gained. It sucks to be turned or destroyed by every cleric you meet because you're only a 3hd undead facing level 10 clerices. And as for the stone giant, they don't even have any odd abilities (incorporeal, create spawn, etc.) to compensate. A stone giant has a lot of problems from RP and equipment gathering perspectives, and to expect that he'll be able to compete with an 18th level fighter is a little much.

 

[Pax]

One thing to keep in mind: if a creatures final ECL is more than double it's final number of HD, it will be VERY vulnerable to damage in combat.

My personal ruleis, no Level Adjusted characetrs whose HD total is less than half their net ECL.

Otherwise, I'd have to agree that the concept is, some abilities are of greater use OUTSIDE of combat, or to PC's in general, than toa monster who is (really) only there to get in a fight with the PCs.

In the case of a Shadow -- a Shadow/Rogue(5) -- ECL 15 -- in a party with an evil Cleric, can be Bolstered. The necromancer can pelt him with Negative Energy Ray (1st level spell) to "heal" him.

And those're just the two obvious ways to buff the shadow ...

Incorporeality means he can slip through locked doors to scout ahead; stick his head INTO a chest to take a look inside (if he has an incorporeal light source of some sort, anyway); that sort of thing.

And Create Spawn means, eventually, he'll be commanding some incorporeal minions, too.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

The real difference isn't JUST how useful abilities are outside of combat. A CR is how well a monster should do in combat against a party of 4 adventurers, generally playtested against a balanced adventuring party. A monster may have a 30 strength, which means each time it attacks, it will hit and do a lot of damage, however, since it will likely die in 1-4 rounds of attacks by a party, it only gets to make between 1-4 attacks, making it not too dangerous to that party.

However, a PC may get many more attacks each combat, and will fight in many combats in an adventure. So those same pluses to hit and damage become much more powerful in their hands.

The same thing applies to some special abilities. A creature may have a list of 10 or 15 spell like abilities that it can use at will. It may only use 2 or 3 of these during any given combat, though. Some of these abilities may not be useful during combat either, and therefore were not factored into the CR.

As was said, a monster who is incorporeal will likely only gain the benefit of the 50% miss chance, and even then only for a couple of rounds. The PC with that ability gets the miss chance many, many more times and is much more likely to be fighting enemies without magic weapons. The PC also now has the power to bypass traps, locked doors, etc. This ability can ruin adventure plots, especially low level ones that aren't built to accomidate them. Also, all his attacks are touch attacks, bypassing armor. The PC will likely roll hundreds of attack rolls in his adventuring carreer rather than 3 the monster may get the roll.

 

[Scupper]

The real problem with ECL, in my opinion, is that it's a half-assed attempt at a point balance system without using points (or really any useful guidelines whatsoever). This isn't to say that there doesn't need to be some kind of adjustment, because some races clearly are superior to the "standard" ones, via significant spell-like abilities, unbalanced stats, extra hit dice, and so on.

For ECL to be at all accurate, it should take into account the weaknesses, character-wise, of the creature as well. A shadow, for instance, might be useful to a player with no interest in communicating with any normal NPC in the game world, but the player had better be ready to sit around bored while the rest of the party talks to NPCs. He also can't use any non-ghost touch equipment. He also can't open doors for his friends, pull levers, or anything else. Sure, he can sneak into the treasure vault through the walls, but he can't pick up the treasure, nor could he take it through the walls if he did. And he can be turned, or even destroyed, by a sufficiently powerful cleric.

A stone giant PC may be really strong, but he also can't stay in an Inn, can't fit in small passages, can't cross a rope bridge, can't wear any kind of normal armor, etc. Dwarves get a bonus to hit him. Towns are likely to erupt into pitchfork and torch-weilding mobs if he shows up unannounced.

Systems like HERO and GURPS use point balancing to try to accurately describe a particular race's advantages and disadvantages in comparison to any other race. If all you do is look at advantages (which is virtually all Savage Species does), you get a pretty useless benchmark.

I don't know anyone who would play any creature with more than a +2 or +3 ECL. It's just not worth it, no matter what the creature's abilities are. Take a Drow PC: He'll never equal any of the other characters in a standard party in fighting ability at equivalent level. AND almost all NPCs hate him, to boot. AND the drow are probably none to happy with him, either, if he is considered a turncoat. He can't shop in a store or walk down a street, but a little spell resistance and some low-level spell-like abilities make him a great character? I think not. He's going to need some character levels just to soak up the damage from people throwing crap at him as he passes through town.

I just don't use ECL as written. If somebody wants to play a nonstandard race, I'll evaluate how well that character will do in the campaign and assign an ECL based on that (or rule out the race altogether).

 

[spunky_mutters]

Thank you to all replying. I just want to reiterate that I do understand what they are trying to do, I just can't convince myself that they have succeeded (and since I am going to need a method for calculating something like ECL for >CR3 creatures, I need to convince myself that what I am doing is reasonable).

As far as I am concerned letting a player take a race that has abilities with the potential to ruin an adventure is the DMs purview, and is outside the scope of what they can hope to accomplish. I feel that they have attempted to do that and have caused an imbalance.

My big problem is that they have made CR determination useless for classed monsters with an ECL greater than their CR (obviously 1 or 2 points isn't going to be a breaker). A stone giant character (level 18) fighting another stone giant one on one would get no XP (CR difference is >8).

What level is a Shadow/Rogue5? He's level 15, but is only CR8 according to the SS CR determination rules. In attempting to 'balance' monster abilities that they feel are too extraordinary outside of combat (and it has to be outside of combat, as those for combat use should be reflected in the CR) they have made it impossible to determine level-appropriate encounters for a party of high ECL races using their CR system.

Yes, most adventures don't expect the party to be incorporeal, but the DM needs to be the one to determine what races players are allowed to take. Weighting them like this simply makes the DMs job of balancing combat encounters more difficult by removing his ability to use CR to determine challenge for a monstrous party (again 1 or 2 ECL isn't a problem, the problem is that it doesn't scale).

 

[Savage Wombat]

It doesn't help that the rules for monster advancement contradict themselves when it comes to classes.

If I'm a 16 HD monster, then according to the MM, giving me +8 HD gives me a CR adjustment of +1. If I'm +16 HD, that's +2 CR.

If, however, I took fighter levels, I'd be a 2nd level Fighter for +2 CR.

This means, according to the MM, that an 18 HD creature is just as dangerous as a 32 HD creature. All the same abilities - just the 18 HD creature has two more feats.

 

[spunky_mutters]

I think I'm going to have to use CR as the ECL and break down the monster levels based no that for my next game. I believe that the downsides to most monstrous races will be enough to help balance the positives. I do plan to enforce these downsides as appropriate (i.e. not to 'pick on' players, but to make them appreciate the niche they have selected for their monstrous characters). Since I forsee a high turnover in characters, this will give me a chance to fiddle with things and achieve a balance I can live with.

 

[kreynolds]

Spunky, keep in mind that all monster CRs are lower than they actually are. The reason for this is that their CRs assume the monster will be facing four or five opponents. So, before you can find the monster's ECL, you need to find it's true CR. Look to Upper_Krust for that.