Revised Challenge Ratings/Encounter Levels (pdf)

[demiurgeastaroth]

Re: Re: Pseudo-deity Package

The deific abilities each rate approx. +1 CR.

Ah, this bit if info allows me to calculate the CR of both versions of Tiamat

Just need the value of the Lernean quality for hydras now. Come on, stop dawdling

Darren

 

[Anubis]

Anubis.

Your replies consist of quoting the rules verbatim. Rules that I think everybody are acquainted with at this point (including myself, who took the longest to understand them). You're not saying anything new, nor do your replies constitute any kind of argument.

-----

Upper_Krust.

More math for you. By calculating XP for individual monsters, rather than groups of monsters, sometimes you get less XP, sometimes you get more.

When you get these XP discrepancies, it is usually around a factor of 0.1 or 0.1R%. As in the differences between 200 and 225.

For example, in the more XP category, let's say instead of sending 4 hobgoblins at 0 CR against a party of 1st level PCs, you send 5 hobgoblins instead. The EL does not change at all, but now each characters nets 250 XP each.

Ultimately the difference is negligible, and certainly not enough to diminish the exaggerated XP totals your CR system churns out right now. In fact, it increases them in many cases. So whether you use "group" or "individual" XP for PC opponents, the problem of inflated XP does not go away.

I'm not sure how right now, but I'm certain your solution can be found through calculating EL bonuses for "numbers" the same way for both PCs *and* their opponents. To make this possible, however, I'm pretty sure the CR to EL values you consider sacrosanct will have to change.

Um, the REASON you're not understanding are arguments is because your argument has NO BASIS. The numbers ARE NOT INFLATED as you suggest. By UK's system, you get the XP you deserve. I have been testing the system for weeks now IN ACTUAL GAMEPLAY, and I have not seen ANY inflated XP awards. My PCs reached Level 2 after 7 encounters, one of which was against a bugbear, two goblins, and four hobgoblins. I might add that one PC died in that encounter and only one was still "up" after the battle because ti was so difficult. This is not inflated, this is perfect.

Still need to work out kinks, but this is NOT one of those things.

 

[demiurgeastaroth]

I have been testing the system for weeks now IN ACTUAL GAMEPLAY, and I have not seen ANY inflated XP awards. My PCs reached Level 2 after 7 encounters,

Sounds inflated to me. It's supposed to take around 14 standard encounters, regardless of level. Maybe your PCs are consistently facing tougher encounters than standard.

Darren

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hiya seasong mate!

Situational modifiers: There is an incredibly beautiful ("My God, it's full of stars!") way to handle situational modifiers. It won't work for absolutely every situation, and it takes some work, but... here are the generic situational modifiers:

If the monster can not retaliate in any way: No XP. No exceptions. Doesn't matter how tough the monster is, if there is no chance of retaliation, there is no risk, and hence, no XP.

Note: a situation where the PCs can not retaliate in any form or fashion at all should not give XP (they couldn't do anything), but also should be used only sparingly, if at all, in a D&D campaign.

If the situation nullifies one of the monster's abilities: Drop that ability from the monster's CR. This is the lightning strike I just had. If the situation nullifies the party's abilities, same thing in reverse.

If the situation enhances on of the monster's abilities: Use the enhanced ability as the CR. Ditto the party.

These can be combined. If the monster can retaliate, but only in some piddly way, rebuild the monster as if it was a piddly attacker with its full defenses. That is, Upper Krust's system lets you figure out the CR of a 50 HD creature that only has a 1d4 ranged fire damage attack, so work it out!

PCs get a surprise round: CR minus 1/4th the party's level. This is designed to scale with how much damage the party can dish out by the round, and assumes that in an ideal situation, the party can kill another party in an average of 4 rounds.

Monsters get a surprise round: CR plus 1/4th the monster's CR. See above.

Most situational modifiers can be put in as fractions of the 1/4th level factor. For example, if a ranged party is attacking a foe who is far away and has no ranged attacks (no ability to fight back), subtract 1/4th the party's level per round it will take him to reach the party.

Note: Most of these can be handled somewhat on the fly. If the dragon is in a narrow space, look up his flight in Upper Krust's system, and subtract that from his CR. Simple, see?

Anyway, I'm sure there are holes. This is the lightning strike, not the refined product . But I think it might be a good start to some well defined situational modifiers.

Very, very interesting idea. I think this could be fleshed out to provide 'generic' situational modifiers (or somesuch) and there effect on EL.

Not totally sure the 'reducing CR' idea for unavailable options is viable though, seems a bit pedantic...

...I was thinking more along the lines of:

-1 EL if denied access to some abilities.
-1 EL if PCs had time to prepare specifically for the encounter.
etc.

I am sure there are many others to think up.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hiya mate!

Perhaps my explanation was too complex.

Indeed.

Simply put, it's simpler than any other solution so far given.

Except that so far only you have understood it.

Only joking, as soon as I reread it again this morning (sans headache) I got it right away.

Lemme say it again in simpler terms.

Okay.

Step 1: Find the difference between the WotC SR and the WotC CR. (e.g. Lemure, SR 5, CR 1, Difference +4)

Step 2: Calculate UK CR and EL. (e.g. Lemure, UK CR 2.75; CR 2, EL 5)

Step 3: Add difference between WotC SR and WotC CR to UK EL to determine new UK SR. (e.g. Lemure, Difference +4, EL 5; NEW SR 9)

*Optional* Step 4: Determine value of new SR and repeat Steps 1-3 until final whole CR does not increase. (e.g. Lemure, UK CR +0.4, CR 3.15; CR 3, EL 7; EL +2, SR 11; UK CR +0.2, CR 3.35, Final Result) I repeat, this is optional and probably unnecessary. For simplicity's sake, only follow Steps 1-3. Step 4 is for experimental purposes only.

Then simply use EL as caster level when rolling for spell penetration. A Level 20 PC Wizard is EL 18, so spell penetration is 1d20+18.

So essentially this is exactly the same as my idea except we have to rework every monsters Spell Resistance first.

Thanks for clearing that up, UK. That's what I was trying to say. You just said it better, heh.

Thats what I am here for dude!

*Raises Hand*

That would be me. Remember on MSN when I said that you went from giving XP per monster to XP per group and I said I didn't like the results? This is what I meant. I dropped it because in the end, I understood your reasoning and felt that you were right to judge by group.

My short term memory is very poor but you are probably right - I could have sworn someone mentioned it.

As much as I would enjoy you reversing, I'm going to now defend your original position. Hehehe.

You see, giving XP per monster ignores the challenge posed by multiple creatures.

I'm still looking into this, I haven't settled on anything yet.

Consider the following two examples. In example 1, the party faces a goblin in combat, then later faces another single goblin in combat, and then later faces a third lone goblin in combat. In example 2, the party faces 3 goblins at the same time. Think about it. If you give XP per creature, both situations will give the PCs (assuming a party of four) 150 XP each. If you give XP per encounter, however, the battle against the three goblins at once will instead give the PCs 225 XP each.

Now to say that XP should be given per creature invalidates the FACT that the single battle against three goblins at once IS IN FACT more difficult than three different encounters against lone goblins. See what I'm saying? This is why I reversed my position on the EL issue and also why you should not reverse yours, UK. I think you know this and are just letting some misinformation get to you at this point.

Its plausible, I think some people may have been misusing the system - which is technically my fault because I should have made things clearer in the first place.

This requires A LOT of math, but I like it anyway! I think this could be the best solution. In this case, though, UK should release the official numbers for all creatures (the actual CR numbers and not the final whole CR numbers).

Yeah I can just see it now - instead of simply including all the revised CRs from the Monster Manual I can breakdown every single monster point by point. It should only take another 100 pages!

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey all.

Hiya mate!

Was just reading seasong's list of situational modifiers, and I have to disagree that a monster with no way of retaliating is worth no exp. It is an obstical that requires resources. Like a locked door, except it's a locked door that requires 20% of your resources. I give exp for puzzles and other obsticles even if they pose no physical threat to the PCs. Even tho the monster WOULD pose a threat if the PCs fought it on the ground, lets say. What you are doing is encouraging PCs to fight dumb, cause fighting dumb would earn them exp, whereas fighting smart would lose them exp. I say that any ability the PCs negate from the monster in question should still be worth EXP. Afterall, the PCs did gain experience from the fight, ie, learning how to negate ability X from monster Y.

Indeed, I think situational modifiers are more to do with circumstances rather than PCs using their powers.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Upper_Krust.

Hiya mate!

More math for you. By calculating XP for individual monsters, rather than groups of monsters, sometimes you get less XP, sometimes you get more.

When you get these XP discrepancies, it is usually around a factor of 0.1 or 0.1R%. As in the differences between 200 and 225.

For example, in the more XP category, let's say instead of sending 4 hobgoblins at 0 CR against a party of 1st level PCs, you send 5 hobgoblins instead. The EL does not change at all, but now each characters nets 250 XP each.

Ultimately the difference is negligible, and certainly not enough to diminish the exaggerated XP totals your CR system churns out right now. In fact, it increases them in many cases. So whether you use "group" or "individual" XP for PC opponents, the problem of inflated XP does not go away.

I'm not sure how right now, but I'm certain your solution can be found through calculating EL bonuses for "numbers" the same way for both PCs *and* their opponents. To make this possible, however, I'm pretty sure the CR to EL values you consider sacrosanct will have to change.

Indeed, upon reflection I don't consider it a viable solution (I did have a headache last night thats probably the reason for my meandering), in fact I am not sure if one is even necessary.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Re: Re: Re: Pseudo-deity Package

Hiya mate!

It was the template for divinity I was interested in, thanks.

Okay then.

It is the same as the abilities gained by a Rank 0 deity in Deities & Demigods?

Its certainly not identical. Its 'similar' in many respects though, but probably fractionally better.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Re: Re: Re: Playtesting

Hello again mate!

I'll give a few examples Tuesday - no time to look through notes today, and the session is tomorrow

Okay.

Nope, no use of harm, and the spellcasters providely basically indirect aid. Turning the ground to mud in an attempt to collaopse the tunnel it was making to escape, that kind of thing.
The Monk and the Fighter, using spring attack did most of it. Then the fighter went in toe-to-toe, and his close quarters fighting feat acually stopped him getting grabbed once. When he did get swallowed, a bracelet of friends was used to bring him out, and he charged back in again - it would have only taken another round without that

The tarrasque has a really poor AC (compared to other creatures encountered by CR24 creatures),

True, it should have NA 42 (Half scaled/Half Carapace)

and it was very easy for the fighter to rack up damage - there was even one round where the monk managed to do about a 100 points (a couple of criticals countering the last couple of misses). There were rounds where they players were basically breaking even, just cancelling it's regeneration, and the fight did go on for soemwhere in the 10-20 round range, but the players where never in serious danger.

They really weakened the Tarrasque when they removed its Sharpness bite.

And my tarrasque was actually beefed up. Note the official tarrasque has no power attack. The damage dice of each of its attacks was doubled, and it got a substantial power attack bonus.
Spellcasters did have some effect - not all of their spells are cancelled by the tarrasque's defences, though it's hard to get it to fail a save.

The have roughly the wealth of a typical 24th level group (and sunk about 10-15% of it into inherent ability bonuses, because of which I'd been treating them as 25th level for XP and challenge purposes).

That's more wealth than your document suggests: about the same as 26th level character, which wouldn't change ther PEL.

Indeed.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Re: Heal and Harm

Hiya mate!

I would replacing the Heal and Harm listed in the document with the new 3.5e versions, which appear to be: heal (or harm) 10 points per level to a maximum of 150.

I dunno, it means Harm is still overpowered.

They are about twice as effective, but otherwise clerics will find they need to memorise too many heal spells and are once more relegated to this role.

Clerics don't need to memorise healing spells, they have that spontaneous casting thingamy - don't they...?

Also, as fixed effects, you can't use Empower, Maximise or Intensify on them, so it's not all good for the caster. But the important thing is maintaining as much compatibility with standard rules as possible.

Exactly, so they are actually less powerful at epic/immortals levels.

Well people can use either method.