Revised Challenge Ratings/Encounter Levels (pdf)

[Upper_Krust]

Re: Playtesting

Hello again mate!

I'm going to be playtesting the CR system over the next monthy or two, so if there are any current alterations to CR calculations not listed in version 3 of the file, could you post them?

I'll have a look later, not sure if I can remember them all...?

Is there going to be a version 4?

At the moment I am not planning one - but I wouldn't rule it out.

One of the main reasons I'm testing it is that I use a LOT of advanced creatures, templates, and creatures with class levels, and I think the official method of calculating these things is really poor.

Indeed.

I've gone over my group's encounters for the last adventure, and I find that if I had use UK's system, I would have given around 27,000XP each rather than 9,000 (they are 24th level). This difference worries me...

Mmmm...interesting.

What did they encounter?

I think I'm a pretty good judge of what my group can handle, and the only encounter that I felt the players deserved more XP for was the tarrasque (about 400xp in the standard system, compared to around 7,000 in UK's). The tarrasque was probably worth around half the UK value (it did consume more than 20% resources, but never seriously threatened them - an EL+2 encounter seems about right).

How did they beat the Tarrasque ~ there may have been a situational modifier in there...remember the Tarrasque has no ranged attacks, so if the PCs took it down at range I would apply a -2 EL mod. Also I take it they didn't use the old Harm or Heal spells.

Remember also that they would have had to expend 5000 XP to finish him off as well.

I find that if I halve the XP values generated by UK's system, this feels about right. I'm not sure whether that's true at all levels, or is something that only occurs at certain levels. It might point to a fundamental problem with the system, or it might just be that my group is powerful for it's EL. I don't know, but that's the one change I'll be making to the system for playtesting purposes.

Does the party have wealth within the current parameters?

 

[Sonofapreacherman]

Actually this CAN make perfect sense. Just because increases are the same does NOT mean that XP awards will go up or down at the same rate.

Here you miss the point originally by also embracing the current system.

When you take four 1st-level player characters and four 1st level non-player characters, the player characters already have an advantage. This is reflected in their Challenge Ratings.

The party of four 1st-level player characters is CR 1.
The party of four 1st-level non-player characters is CR 0.

Now advance two levels.

The party of four 2nd-level player characters is CR 2.
The party of four 2nd-level non-player characters is CR 1.

The party of four 3rd-level player characters is CR 3
The party of four 3rd-level non-player characters is CR 2.

In every one of these examples, there should be a mathematical certainty that the player characters earn less (base) XP each time (before being multiplied by average level).

But that's not how it works.

Instead (using the current system) the XP breaks down like this...

Level 1 (225 XP) --> Level 2 (150 XP) --> Level 3 (450 XP.)

The base XP in each case (before being multiplied by average character level and divided by 4) is 900 XP --> 300 XP --> 600 XP.

This breaks what should be a mathematical constant of steadily decreasing XP rewards.

 

[Sonofapreacherman]

Upper_Krust.

demiurgeastaroth makes a good point about inflated XP. Too much XP is being doled out for both piddly lower-level and epic higher-level encounters.

I think the problem starts in EL jump. 1 to 5 between CR 1 and 2 is too much, no matter how sacrosanct you consider your equations for reaching those values.

I noticed you just posted a reply to me. In that post you say...

A party of four 20th-level (player) characters are PEL 18
But the same party of four 20th-level characters (with PC equipment) encountered by another PC party will be EL 22 (18 + 4).

Okaaaaaay ... I know how your system works, so restating it doesn't solve the problem. The NPCs should not receive more CR bonuses for their numbers than the characters. The above encounter should be a 50/50 challenge.

But once again, just like Anubis did, you conveniently gave the NPCs player characters wealth. This does not serve the majority of situations, where the NPCs will have NPC wealth, right?



So the NPCs in your example would more commonly rate CR 18/EL 17.

This seems about right. They are a weaker challenge and would only award 1000 XP to each party member (Base 200 x 20 / 4).

But your current system goes on to beef up the NPCs with +4 EL for their numbers (a bonus that the PCs, for reasons unexplained, do not enjoy).

By your system, the PCs would receive 4500 X for each party member (Base 900 x 20 / 4).

I think you know why demiurgeastaroth has identified an inflated XP problem with your CR system. Now you just have to see it and hopefully become a part of, if not spearhead, the solution.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hiya mate!

Funny. You didn't actually say anything here, except to regurgitate how the system currently works ... without seemingly understanding why (hence your inability to objectively question it). No matter. Let's see if I can clear it up.

I think I see a flaw in your reasoning...

First of all, a party of four 1st level characters are CR 1 and EL 1.

Actually EL 5 (PEL 1)

A party of four 1st level NPCs would be CR 0 and (presumably) EL 0.

Actually EL 4.

The NPCs would represent an easy challenge to the player characters. Not a moderate challenge at all.

I would have said they represent a difficult challenge since they practically match the PCs, its almost a 50/50 encounter.

Because the player characters are already inherently more powerful than the NPCs, why would NPCs receive a greater CR bonus for the same number of opponents?

They don't. You don't substitute PEL for EL when creating an encounter.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Optional Spell Resistance

Hi Ashardalon mate!

For the record... it is not just you.

As far as a half-fiendish great red wyrm can count in the battle of gods.

Appreciate the confirmation my draconian friend - normally I wouldn't ask but I have a bit of a headache at the moment and I could simply be reading it wrong.

 

[Sonofapreacherman]

Re: Re: Playtesting

How did they beat the Tarrasque ~ there may have been a situational modifier in there...remember the Tarrasque has no ranged attacks, so if the PCs took it down at range I would apply a -2 EL mod. Also I take it they didn't use the old Harm or Heal spells.

I'm sorry, but you do this repeatedly. Every time somebody presents evidence that your CR system might need fixing, your try to invalidate it by questing their dungeon mastering. You have got to realize that not everybody is going to dungeon master their campaigns the same way you do, and so your CR system has to take that into account. Not with situational modifiers, but with concrete modifiers. That's the whole point remember? You want to avoid situational modifiers as much as possible. Otherwise your system will be doomed to make all the same mistakes that WotC has made.

People are already asking you to rate all the monsters in the manuals for them. Ego-boosting as this might be, you have taken the place of WotC when it comes to handing down "official" CR values. I thought your system was supposed to empower people with the tools to make those concrete calculations themselves.

Rather than doing the work for us, how about making the system work seamlessly so we can do the work for ourselves?

 

[Upper_Krust]

To sonofapreacherman (mainly).

Okay I have a bit of a headache at the moment but I think the EXP solution has just clicked.

Instead of using the EL difference of the encounter to determine EXP, instead use the EL difference for each individual creature.

I'm guessing someone has likely mentioned this before, I must have missed the 'gist' of it initially.

 

[Sonofapreacherman]

To sonofapreacherman (mainly).

Okay I have a bit of a headache at the moment but I think the EXP solution has just clicked.

Instead of using the EL difference of the encounter to determine EXP, instead use the EL difference for each individual creature.

I'm guessing someone has likely mentioned this before, I must have missed the 'gist' of it initially.

I'll be honest, I'm not sure what you mean here. Could you play it out with an example, complete with behind the scenes calculations?

 

[Upper_Krust]

Re: Re: Re: Playtesting

Hello again mate!

I'm sorry, but you do this repeatedly. Every time somebody presents evidence that your CR system might need fixing, your try to invalidate it by questing their dungeon mastering.

I think I am within my rights asking for some encounter details. I'm not questioning anyones dungeonmastering, but DMing styles can vary and this is something that can palpably affect CRs/ELs.

You have got to realize that not everybody is going to dungeon master their campaigns the same way you do, and so your CR system has to take that into account. Not with situational modifiers, but with concrete modifiers. That's the whole point remember? You want to avoid situational modifiers as much as possible. Otherwise your system will be doomed to make all the same mistakes that WotC has made.

Of course, but you still have to acknowledge that situational modifiers exist.

People are already asking you to rate all the monsters in the manuals for them. Ego-boosting as this might be, you have taken the place of WotC when it comes to handing down "official" CR values. I thought your system was supposed to empower people with the tools to make those concrete calculations themselves.

Whats stopping them? If people ask me for this or that CR I don't mind helping them out; but I am not really giving them something they couldn't already do themselves using my system.

Rather than doing the work for us, how about making the system work seamlessly so we can do the work for ourselves?

Whether I determine a CR or someone else uses my system to determine one they should arrive at the same results, frankly I don't see what your problem is here.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hello mate!

I'll be honest, I'm not sure what you mean here. Could you play it out with an example, complete with behind the scenes calculations?

Okay, lets see.

Party of four 1st-level characters = PEL 1

vs.

Group of four hobgoblins CR 1/2 = EL 4 (0 + 4)

PEL 1 vs. EL 4 (difference 3: almost 50/50, quite difficult)

EXP awarded (use individual hobgoblins x 4).

PEL 1 vs. EL 0 (individual Hobgoblin) = PC Level x 200 (EL -1 difference).

Total EXP = 800 (200 per Hobgoblin).

EXP per PC = 200