Revised Challenge Ratings/Encounter Levels (pdf)

[demiurgeastaroth]

Re: racial CR adjustments

Hello again mate! (U_K)

Hello!

The annoyance for me is that I have actually revised them all not so long ago but a few changes to the CR mods and you have to go back and do the whole thing over again.

I would have put them all in a spreadsheet as I worked them out, and then just changed the base data table - get everything updated automatically!

Also I would like to keep the Immortals Handbook under a thousand pages, pdf or not.

If you've done the work, you should really distribute it to save others. Maybe a promotional web enhancement might be the ticket.

I have been toying with the idea of a monster manual (low CRs to high CRs, rather that alphabetical - for the most) is more appropriate but of course this then messes with the Epic CRs (in that its practically a new CR per monster) so I don't know yet what to do for the best.

Maybe I'm tired, but that paragraph looks garbled to me.
Um, could you rephrase?

Darren

 

[S'mon]

Re: Re: Re: ECL calculation

Hey demiurgeastaroth mate! (U_K here)

I think it probably should, too - that would certainly justify making them equal cost.

Indeed.

This sounds reasonable (caveat: that's without testing ).
But I think there is a problem with the way the spell-like abilities are costed: the caster level is part of the formula. With many abilities, this may not be appropriate. For spells like teleport, for example, the level makes very little difference once you have the ability.

Doesn't teleport allow additional weight to be carried dependant upon caster level...?

Only those abilities where the level has a direct effect (damage rolls, spell penetration, and to a much, much lesser effect (especially for multiple use abilities) duration) should this be a factor.

Not necessarily, because remember there is always the dispelling factor to consider.

For such abilities, maybe the scroll cost could be a guidelines: use the minimum caster level the ability becomes available.

I'll have a think about it.

Quirky Example
Note: Teleport without error at will, +.3 at 13th level ability.
Increase movement by 30': +.3

I know that teleport has a few drawbacks (can't be used to attack in the same turn (unless they take quicken spell-like ability...), but I think it might be worth a lot more than 30' of movement...

Lets remember the design parameters though.

Yes, At Will is for all intents and purposes Always Active - and you get to use it on others. If anything, it should cost more.

Well, remember that if dispelled it returns automatically without requiring an action.

That's quite a difference Not that I'm arguing.

Its a tricky one, I'll have to give the matter some thought.

That's true, but the points he makes are valid for both even if the method differs.

Not entirely, given my CR/EL relationship.

I don't think this is necessarily a strong equipment, especially for equipment, since for every item other players have to supply that power, the monster-character has a free slot (or money not spent on that item) to spend on other things of equal power.

True, but he can't say on the one hand be careful about flying characters when on the other that capability can be gained very early in a characters career.

Whereas something like Fast Healing or Regeneration is not so easily acquired.

I'm in the camp that leans towards factoring them into CR...

Obviously that gives more accurate results, but we determined that it technically wasn't necessary and therefore extreneous.

In the article, you mention that it balances if all other things are treated equally, but I don't think this is the case. One creature may have very high stats (STR and CON being popular) while another has less powerful stats but various spell-like abilities and powers to make up for it.

All of which is quantified by the system.

A large part of the danger posed by giants (for example) comes about entirely because of their high STR and CON (which are usually notably higher than the bonuses gained just from size).

Ability scores are already factored into the size modifier

This is true, but on its own is not enough.

I just worked out an Ogre, and his ECL came out at 6 (including 6 levels of equipment). I made a mistake, in that I counted all his stats, including the size increase, so it should be a lower ECL. But assuming 6:

Factoring the ogres ability scores means deducting +1 from size.

Since the size also factors Str +8; Con +4 and Dex -2 (Total +10)

A 10th level Barbarian with 17 STR (including his two raises) and 14 CON would have a BAB of +13, inflict 1d12+4 damage, and has 90 hit points without magic items and feats.
(It's appropriate to ignore them, since they both get equal - or nearly equal - selections and are ikely to pick the same things.)

A 4th level Barbarian Ogre would have STR 27 and CON 18, giving him a BAB of +15, inflicting 1d12+12, and has 79 or 81 hit points (depending on whether he gets the d8 or d12 hit die maximised).

On the face of it, these look roughly comparable. The Ogre hits more often (possibly allowing him to make better use of power attack), does twice as much damage (that ratio will fall once magic weapons are included, but it will still be significantly higher), for the cost of falling after 8 hits as opposed to 9. Plus Reach, benefits with grapples, and all that.

Considering the ECL by the system is probably less than 6, it falls short under the current rules. Admittedly it's only one example, but it's examples like this it has to work for.

The Ogres ECL is probably 5 (off the top of my head).

As far as I can see it balances pretty well with a 5th-level character.

Of course there is always the problem of getting ogre sized magic items (notably weapons).

Yes, I don't think I meant what I said But I think the number of abilities that require a different total is a lot higher than 1%. (Exactly how much higher, I don't know.)

Well after Fast Healing and Regeneration the only hurdle seems to be certain applications of spell-like abilities.

 

[S'mon]

Re: Re: racial CR adjustments

Hello!

Hello again mate! (U_K)

I would have put them all in a spreadsheet as I worked them out, and then just changed the base data table - get everything updated automatically!

It sounds good in hindsight...

If you've done the work, you should really distribute it to save others. Maybe a promotional web enhancement might be the ticket.

I'll type it up in a day or so when I get the chance to see how it looks.

Maybe I'm tired, but that paragraph looks garbled to me.
Um, could you rephrase?

Okay. In the back of the monster manual they outline the monsters by Challenge Rating. Going from the lowest CR to the highest CRs.

I was thinking of doing my revisions like that, but then of course you have to look for the monster you want, so it slows you down...yadda yadda yadda.

 

[Zaknafein]

A few class questions?

Was curious if these enhancements due to Level progression would make their CR higher:

Monks/Barbarian movement
Paladins Immunity to disease
Monks Immunity to poison
Paladins Special Mount (such as pegasus)
Wizards/Sorcerers Familiar (giving them Alertness plus other perks)
Assasins use of poison
Assasins use of death strike
etc.

thanks in advance....

-in honor zaknafein

 

[Sonofapreacherman]

Upper_Krust.

So if the hobgoblins factor racial abilities like darkvision into their CR, then let's take a look at a 2nd level party of four going up against four 2nd level fighter hobgoblins.

The player characters = PEL 2.
Hobgoblins = PEL 9

That's a difference of +7. By your rules, this is near the higher end of a "very difficult/nemesis" encounter.

In truth, those hobgoblins should represent a "moderate/elite footsolder" encounter. They are 1 step above a typical hobgoblin footsoldier. They certainly shouldn't be any stronger than a "difficult/henchmen" encounter. But a nemesis encounter? Not even close.

The 2nd level player characters would net 1800 XP each for this encounter. That's exactly 3 times more XP than the 3rd edition CR/XP system (600 XP) awards for the same encounter!

Again, this is "if" you factor in darkvision.

If you do not, the player characters earn much less XP.

The player character = PEL 2.
Hobgoblins = PEL 5

That's a difference of +3 or 450 XP each. I think that's infinitely more reasonable than 1800 XP, even if and rather because its lower than the WotC amount.

If you still want to factor in racial abilities like darvision for "consistency", then we get back to my original suggestion; calculating PEL as EL.

 

[demiurgeastaroth]

Upper_Krust.

So if the hobgoblins factor racial abilities like darkvision into their CR, then let's take a look at a 2nd level party of four going up against four 2nd level fighter hobgoblins.

The player characters = PEL 2.
Hobgoblins = PEL 9

I'm not UpperKrust, but I can see where you went wrong there.

To get the Hobgoblins PEL of 9, you had to compare the CR of the hobgoblins 9 on the CR/EL chart.

In order to find the PEL of the player group, you need to do the same - compare their CR (which equals their level) on the same table (then, if the group modifier isn't abandoned, modify for group size but in this case that can be ignored).
A group of Level 2 characters have a CR of 2,
therefore their EL is 5.

This would mean XP cost would be 1800XP total, or 450 each.

[/B][/QUOTE]
If you do not, the player characters earn much less XP.

The player character = PEL 2.
Hobgoblins = PEL 5

[/B][/QUOTE]
Darkvision is only a +.2 modifier, isn't it? How does it make the Hobgoblin EL jump from 5 to 9?

 

[demiurgeastaroth]

Re: Re: Re: Re: ECL calculation

Hey demiurgeastaroth mate! (U_K here)

Doesn't teleport allow additional weight to be carried dependant upon caster level...?

It does (and I hadn't considered that!)...

 

[demiurgeastaroth]

Re: ECL calculation

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by demiurgeastaroth
Quirky Example
Note: Teleport without error at will, +.3 at 13th level ability.
Increase movement by 30': +.3

I know that teleport has a few drawbacks (can't be used to attack in the same turn (unless they take quicken spell-like ability...), but I think it might be worth a lot more than 30' of movement...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lets remember the design parameters though.

In what sense?

 

[demiurgeastaroth]

Re: ECL calculation agreements

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by demiurgeastaroth
Only those abilities where the level has a direct effect (damage rolls, spell penetration, and to a much, much lesser effect (especially for multiple use abilities) duration) should this be a factor.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not necessarily, because remember there is always the dispelling factor to consider.

Good point.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by demiurgeastaroth
Yes, At Will is for all intents and purposes Always Active - and you get to use it on others. If anything, it should cost more.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Well, remember that if dispelled it returns automatically without requiring an action.

True - so having them equal seems right. Pros and cons for both.

 

[demiurgeastaroth]

Re: ECL ability scores and giants

Note:

True, but he can't say on the one hand be careful about flying characters when on the other that capability can be gained very early in a characters career.

Whereas something like Fast Healing or Regeneration is not so easily acquired.

The latter two are harder to acquire than flying, true, but remember that flying for most characters is a resource that other characters have to supply somehow. It's only at pretty high levels that it becomes a trivial factor in a group.

<about factoring abilities in>
Obviously that gives more accurate results, but we determined that it technically wasn't necessary and therefore extreneous.

I'm not convinced. I think for a lot of creatures, especially ones with STR and CON exceeding that gained from size, they have to be considered - because a lot of threat from many of those creatures comes purely from those two stats (and size, which is already figured).

You say
"All of which is quantified by the system."

But it can't be, because you could have (for the sake of argement) two creatures which are identical, except one does more damage and hits more often because it has higher STR & CON. (The large giants might well qualify here.)

It's the giant humanoids (including attachs, ettins, titans, etc) I have in mind (and to a lesser extend a number of non-humanoid mosters, such as dragons), as some of these creatures do have STR and CON scores greatly in excess of that granted by size.
(In fact, I suspect that an earlier draft had the frost and fire giants as Huge, and Storm and Cloud as Colossal - this is the size they have in the PH, and their stats fit these sizes better).

Anyway, as I originally said (despite the effot invested in writing the above), I lean towards having stats calculated in CR, rather than I'm certain they should be.
Maybe another approach would be to have some kind of guide as to what stats certain CRs should have, and if they have more than this a CR cost is assigned.
But this would be very tricky given the different types of creatures (and also the fact that I don't think WotC get it right either - I feel, for example, most higher CR creatures that rely on spell-like abilities have mental stats which are too weak: there's a real separation between the effectiveness of supernatural and spell-like abilities).

(Ramble over, and the post count increases )