Req: CR estimate for nastier skeleton

[CCamfield]

How would you rate a regular skeleton with the changes of:

- regeneration 1 (except fire and acid)
- ability to 'hide' as an inanimate pile of bones before combat (Hide +10, only while stationary?) or while regenerating, free action to 'reassemble'
- Int 4
- Edit: capable of using weapons. For medium-sized skeletons, typically scimitars, short swords, and half-spears (doing 1d6)

Basically I'm thinking of these as somehow more 'naturally occurring' skeletons, animated by evil forces rather than by clerics or anything like that, and capable of hunting on their own. The regeneration would reflect the ability of the skeleton to reassemble its bones like I think is seen in some old film with Ray Harryhausen special effects.

Maybe the regen shouldn't work against blunt weapons either, if the bones are actually smashed...

 

[Geocorona]

You mean like ghosts in the form of skeletons?

I only see these traits being a significant benefit to the smaller sizes.

My guess:

Tiny 1/2; Small 1/2; Medium-size 1; Large 1-2; Huge 2-3; _Gargantuan 7; Colossal 9

Blunt damage doesn't necessarily shatter bone. It might just snap it, or even just dislocate the bone.

 

[BOZ]

i think the regeneration and other qualities should raise the CR by at least 1 for all these skels. i'd say that blunt weapons should defeat regeneration, as they can grind the bones to powder. slashing and peircing weapons would just cause the bones to chip or break.

 

[Knight Otu]

Are you sure you want regeneration? This will turn other damage types to subdual damage, and undead are immune to subdual damage. Maybe Fast Healing is better?

 

[BOZ]

that's a good point. fast healing makes more sense anyway.

 

[CCamfield]

Are you sure you want regeneration? This will turn other damage types to subdual damage, and undead are immune to subdual damage. Maybe Fast Healing is better?

Hrm, that's something I hadn't thought about.

Yes, Fast Healing would work, although it wouldn't have all of the same horrific effect. Players couldn't "clear" a room, leave, and come back only to see the skeletons reassemble themselves (having regenerated but lying dormant) and attack. But I would get to describe bits of bone animating and reattaching themselves to the skeleton. *evil grin* Maybe Fast Healing could be at a rate of more than 1/round. It doesn't seem as useful for smaller skeletons.

Geocorona, although I mentioned weapons like short swords, that was when thinking of medium-sized skeletons. Larger sizes ought to have appropriately-sized weapons.

 

[Geocorona]

I was thinking that 1 point of regen per round wouldn't be as effective a CR change on a 16 HD creature as a 1 HD creature.

And regeneration is what you need if you want them to be able to reattach bones. The only difference for undead and constructs is that real damage does not get converted to subdual damage. Your blurb could read:

Regeneration (Ex): A *skeleton* can reattach a detached or broken bone instantly by holding it to the stump, or regrow the part in *regrow time* minutes. Fire and acid deal damage which does not regenerate. All other wounds repair at a rate of 1 hit point per round. Undead are not subject to subdual damage, so the Regeneration ability does not convert normal damage to subdual.

 

[Knight Otu]

I seem to remember from the MMII that the Fast Healing description in the front said something to the effect that FH does not allow reattaching, unless otherwise noted. Could someone with the book at hand check this?

 

[Hashmalum]

Are you sure you want regeneration? This will turn other damage types to subdual damage, and undead are immune to subdual damage. Maybe Fast Healing is better?

Feh, mere hyper-technical nit-picking. Make them specifically subject to subdual damage from their own regeneration, then, if you feel the need. The rules should be a tool set for creating cool things, not a Procrustean bed for destroying creativity. I hope the regeneration/undead/construct "conflict" is definitively fixed in 3.5E. There's absolutely no reason why constructs and undead shouldn't have regeneration--it's obviously an unintentional and unforeseen consequence of the way two unrelated rules interact (see the retriever entry in the Monster Manual for proof).

 

[Knight Otu]

A very nice analysis. Yes, I like to stick to the rules. That's why I recommended allowing Fast Healing to be used for re-attaching limbs.