Revised Challenge Ratings/Encounter Levels (pdf)

[Upper_Krust]

Hey Seasong mate!

So, I was playing with classes and CRs again, and I realized what was bothering me.

Upper_Krust averages the CR bonus of all levels for expedient math. At 20th level, the Fighter (with no racial bonuses) is CR 20.26, spot on. But at first level, he's CR 2.455.

0.3 - d10 HD*
0.15 - BAB +1
0.125 - Fort +2
0.2 - base character feat
0.2 - bonus fighter feat
0.08 - 8 skill points
0.8 - all armors and shields
0.4 - all simple and martial weapons**
0.2 - level 1 wealth

* this does not account for the max 1st HD rule.
** technically, a single weapon is a feat, but in practice, "all simple weapons" is no better than "one good simple weapon".

I would have all armor and shields and all simple and martial weapons at +0.4. (total)

Anyway, for simplicity sake, it's not generally worth worrying about - at the low levels, a little extra survivability's not a bad thing, and it all washes out at the higher levels. But it was what was bugging me .

If you try and do it for every individual level you will only end up bogged down in a world of hurt.

 

[seasong]

I would have all armor and shields and all simple and martial weapons at +0.4. (total)

Fair enough . I might argue for +0.6 (simple + martial weapons is better than a single feat, I think, since it also provides flexibility, so maybe +0.3 there; and while heavy armor doesn't provide a lot of advantage, the shield definitely gives some add, so maybe +0.3 there).

If you try and do it for every individual level you will only end up bogged down in a world of hurt.

As I said .

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

weel, something else's been bugging me

Hi there, Krust!

I've had some more time to look at the pdf, and here are a few questions/things that are bothering me.

First, an easy one: the CR's listed for the monsters. Does that include treasure? I know it does for the Balor and like, but what about a dragon? I mean, I often use the value of a creature's treasure to equip it. If the value of the gear is to be included in the CR, it becomes hard to know what CR really is, before you have calculated value of gear and stuff. And how much treasure should a creature have? Your CR are waaay above the MM's so it's really not possible to use the table in the DMG, IMO.

Next, I don't remember if you have mentioned that this will be fixed, but ability modifiers really needs to affect ECL. It works fine for CR with the design parameters, but ECL is a bit different, IMO.
I mean, according to your design parameters, a medium race can have a 18 in all stats without it affecting CR (and thereby ECL). [only modifiers from templates affect CR, it seems] Now, without even considering that PC's have above average stats for any race, I think I've illustrated that there's a major problem here.
So what you think?

he same goes with spell-like abilities...you charge +2ECL for fast healing 1, but the ability to cast (fx) heal at will is only +0,25 CR!?!
I think I've made my point.

(just for fun - just calculated the cost for being able to use as many different spells as a sorcerer, but at will. That came out at +7.875 CR for 20th lvl. A 20th lvl. sorcerer's spellcasting costs +7 CR. I think I would give up a lvl [in case we round up] for being able to use all the spells at will .)

Speaking of spellcasting. Does the cost for integrated spellcasting lvls decrease after 20th lvl? I mean, the benefits are much less after 20th lvl.

Also, what's the CR of integrated Bard, Ranger and Paladin spell casting?

And finally...I think that the very high CR's some monsters have been given according to your system, makes some of their abilities moot.
I'm thinking primarily of SR. A red dragons SR of 32 is worth jack if it's CR is 56! The same can be said for a Pit Fiend, to a lesser degree. It is especially true for almost ALL the epic monsters (CR 90 Atropal, anyone?).
Now, I know that CR and EL are differently related in your system, but still.
The dragon's SR give it +2.2 CR, but it really doesn't help it, not at CR 56 where it won't make any challenge and certainly not use up 20% of resources, and not really at CR 28 where it shoul be 50/50
Any 28th lvl mage worth his salt will bypass SR 32 each and every time.
What I mean is, the SR's in the MM are based on WotC's CR system. Your system makes SR worthless for quite a lot of baddies, I think.
Comments?

I'm looking forward to your replies, and to digging even deeper into the system!

Later,

 

[kreynolds]

Re: weel, something else's been bugging me

A red dragons SR of 32 is worth jack if it's CR is 56!

CR 56 makes for Encounter Level 24. The SR is still effective.

Your system makes SR worthless for quite a lot of baddies, I think.
Comments?

Note the difficulty of the EL.

 

[demiurgeastaroth]

Re: Re: weel, something else's been bugging me

CR 56 makes for Encounter Level 24. The SR is still effective.

And since it's EL24, that means it's a moderate encounter for a group of 56th level characters, against whom, that SR is useless.

Darren

 

[Anubis]

Re: weel, something else's been bugging me

Hi there, Krust!

I've had some more time to look at the pdf, and here are a few questions/things that are bothering me.

First, an easy one: the CR's listed for the monsters. Does that include treasure? I know it does for the Balor and like, but what about a dragon? I mean, I often use the value of a creature's treasure to equip it. If the value of the gear is to be included in the CR, it becomes hard to know what CR really is, before you have calculated value of gear and stuff. And how much treasure should a creature have? Your CR are waaay above the MM's so it's really not possible to use the table in the DMG, IMO.

I have mulled over this question as well, and although I don't know the *official* answer, I know the best answer.

You determine treasure as outlined in the DMG. Use CR. I know the numbers are higher, but also remember that this better shows the challenge. For multiple creatures, determine overal CR/EL *as explained in the DMG and not by UK's system* for purposes of treasure. That means two CR 10 creatures yield a Level 12 treasure, four CR 28 creatures yield a Level 32 treasure, etc.

These numbers work because UK's system actually gives MORE wealth to PCs and NPCs than the DMG does, so it balances out in the end.

Next, I don't remember if you have mentioned that this will be fixed, but ability modifiers really needs to affect ECL. It works fine for CR with the design parameters, but ECL is a bit different, IMO.
I mean, according to your design parameters, a medium race can have a 18 in all stats without it affecting CR (and thereby ECL). [only modifiers from templates affect CR, it seems] Now, without even considering that PC's have above average stats for any race, I think I've illustrated that there's a major problem here.
So what you think?

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!

Stop trying to put ability scores back in the equation! At low levels, it BREAKS THE SYSTEM as I have proven time and again. At high levels, it's meaningless. It may not "compute" as well "on paper", but in use (when done properly and within proper parameters), not factoring in ability scores provides 100% accurate results.

For more, simply read all the posts on this topic and you will see my overwhelming proof.

he same goes with spell-like abilities...you charge +2ECL for fast healing 1, but the ability to cast (fx) heal at will is only +0,25 CR!?!
I think I've made my point.

I agree with you here. I don't think there should be any independent modifiers to ECL. I am with kreynolds on this matter.

(just for fun - just calculated the cost for being able to use as many different spells as a sorcerer, but at will. That came out at +7.875 CR for 20th lvl. A 20th lvl. sorcerer's spellcasting costs +7 CR. I think I would give up a lvl [in case we round up] for being able to use all the spells at will .)

I can fix this. Put "All rules herein are usable only in combination with DM common sense." on the rules, and problem solved. If you don't break the parameters, there is no problem.

Speaking of spellcasting. Does the cost for integrated spellcasting lvls decrease after 20th lvl? I mean, the benefits are much less after 20th lvl.

Also, what's the CR of integrated Bard, Ranger and Paladin spell casting?

I would say no and they don't to the first question. To the second question, I would say they're only worth 0.2 for Bard spells, 0.15 for Paladin spells, and 0.1 for Ranger spells.

And finally...I think that the very high CR's some monsters have been given according to your system, makes some of their abilities moot.
I'm thinking primarily of SR. A red dragons SR of 32 is worth jack if it's CR is 56! The same can be said for a Pit Fiend, to a lesser degree. It is especially true for almost ALL the epic monsters (CR 90 Atropal, anyone?).
Now, I know that CR and EL are differently related in your system, but still.
The dragon's SR give it +2.2 CR, but it really doesn't help it, not at CR 56 where it won't make any challenge and certainly not use up 20% of resources, and not really at CR 28 where it shoul be 50/50
Any 28th lvl mage worth his salt will bypass SR 32 each and every time.
What I mean is, the SR's in the MM are based on WotC's CR system. Your system makes SR worthless for quite a lot of baddies, I think.
Comments?

Well, I have brought this up before, but UK has assured me that changes to SR within his system will make it all clear. I hope he's right, otherwise I'll be using EL instead of Levels for SR. (That means creatures would get EL +X SR, and all checks would be made using EL.)

I hope he doesn't disappoint.

I'm looking forward to your replies, and to digging even deeper into the system!

Later,

I just can't wait for the damn thing to be published.

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

Re: Re: Re: weel, something else's been bugging me

And since it's EL24, that means it's a moderate encounter for a group of 56th level characters, against whom, that SR is useless.

Darren

Thanks. My point exactly.

 

[demiurgeastaroth]

Re: Re: Re: Re: weel, something else's been bugging me

Thanks. My point exactly.

You're welcome Although, since Anubis just said that the published version will take this into account, it may not be an issue. But the cost in the CR document uses the official SR's - so it's hard to judge the merits of whatever the solution is - we can only go by what we've seen.

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

Re: Re: weel, something else's been bugging me

I have mulled over this question as well, and although I don't know the *official* answer, I know the best answer.

You determine treasure as outlined in the DMG. Use CR. I know the numbers are higher, but also remember that this better shows the challenge. For multiple creatures, determine overal CR/EL *as explained in the DMG and not by UK's system* for purposes of treasure. That means two CR 10 creatures yield a Level 12 treasure, four CR 28 creatures yield a Level 32 treasure, etc.

These numbers work because UK's system actually gives MORE wealth to PCs and NPCs than the DMG does, so it balances out in the end.

Thanks. I think this will work. So this means that the creasure value generated from the DMG is included in the CR from this system, or do I have to add the CR of the gear as well, which means recalculating over and over again? Please explain it once more for the slow of mind....

NO NO NO <snip no's>

Stop trying to put ability scores back in the equation! At low levels, it BREAKS THE SYSTEM as I have proven time and again. At high levels, it's meaningless. It may not "compute" as well "on paper", but in use (when done properly and within proper parameters), not factoring in ability scores provides 100% accurate results.

For more, simply read all the posts on this topic and you will see my overwhelming proof.

Well, Anubis, I have read all the posts with your 'overwhelming' proof. And I basically agree.
But I'm not talking about CR, really - I'm talking about ECL. My question was, is U_K going to ensure that ability modifiers affect ECL? According to his system, CR should convert directly to ECL (with the exception of regen and fast healing). This, IMO, just doesn't hold up when applied to PC's. The arguments for this is related to the increased ECL for regen etc.)
A high ability modifier might not have a great effect for CR, but it sure as hell has for the PC that has scores 8-10 higher than the rest of the party.

I would suggest that modifiers outside of those originating from size (+8 str, -2 dex, +4 con for medium to large fx) is added to ECL. This would give more balanced results, IMO.

I agree with you here. I don't think there should be any independent modifiers to ECL. I am with kreynolds on this matter.

Thanks. But my point was also that this ability is extremely powerful (worth far more than fast healing with or without special ECL modification), yet everyone in a party could pocess it without it affecting the party's EL!?
And yes, your DM common sense argument is valid here as well, but the example does not have to be so extreme as heal to be unbalancing. I am waiting to hear what U_K has to say about this.

I can fix this. Put "All rules herein are usable only in combination with DM common sense." on the rules, and problem solved. If you don't break the parameters, there is no problem.

Thanks, o omnipotent oracle. I was trying to illustrate that the cost (and especially ECL) of spell-like abilities might be too low. Besides, this is not breaking the design parameters, but just ultra-meta gaming.
You know, sometimes you have to exaggerate to drive home a point - as I think you well know.

I would say no and they don't to the first question. To the second question, I would say they're only worth 0.2 for Bard spells, 0.15 for Paladin spells, and 0.1 for Ranger spells.

Why no to the first question?
Second question estimations seem fair. Thanks.

Well, I have brought this up before, but UK has assured me that changes to SR within his system will make it all clear. I hope he's right, otherwise I'll be using EL instead of Levels for SR. (That means creatures would get EL +X SR, and all checks would be made using EL.)

I hope he doesn't disappoint.

Me too

I just can't wait for the damn thing to be published.

ditto.

Thanks for your answer.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Re: weel, something else's been bugging me

Hi there, Krust!

Hi Sorcica mate!

I've had some more time to look at the pdf, and here are a few questions/things that are bothering me.

Sure fire away.

First, an easy one: the CR's listed for the monsters. Does that include treasure?

Not unless the treasure is outlined in the description...as with the Balor's sword, Astral deva's Mace etc.

I know it does for the Balor and like, but what about a dragon?

How could I possibly anticipate how the DM was going to outfit an individual dragon?

I mean, I often use the value of a creature's treasure to equip it. If the value of the gear is to be included in the CR, it becomes hard to know what CR really is, before you have calculated value of gear and stuff. And how much treasure should a creature have? Your CR are waaay above the MM's so it's really not possible to use the table in the DMG, IMO.

Well remember Dragons are NPCs so I would suggest you halve their CRs then use the new figure on the Treasure Tables.

I'll add that into the final version for clarity.

Next, I don't remember if you have mentioned that this will be fixed, but ability modifiers really needs to affect ECL. It works fine for CR with the design parameters, but ECL is a bit different, IMO.

Ability Scores do affect ECL.

I'll make this a lot clearer in the final version.

I mean, according to your design parameters, a medium race can have a 18 in all stats without it affecting CR (and thereby ECL). [only modifiers from templates affect CR, it seems] Now, without even considering that PC's have above average stats for any race, I think I've illustrated that there's a major problem here. So what you think?

They do add to ECL, I'll just have to make this clearer.

he same goes with spell-like abilities...you charge +2 ECL for fast healing 1, but the ability to cast (fx) heal at will is only +0,25 CR!?!
I think I've made my point.

Well the ECL to cast heal at will would be ECL +1.45

6th-level spell +1.2 ECL (for highest SLA)
Heal at will +0.25 (depending on level, I suppose you chose minimum).

Another point I need to clarify.

(just for fun - just calculated the cost for being able to use as many different spells as a sorcerer, but at will. That came out at +7.875 CR for 20th lvl. A 20th lvl. sorcerer's spellcasting costs +7 CR. I think I would give up a lvl [in case we round up] for being able to use all the spells at will .)

Speaking of spellcasting. Does the cost for integrated spellcasting lvls decrease after 20th lvl? I mean, the benefits are much less after 20th lvl.

Also, what's the CR of integrated Bard, Ranger and Paladin spell casting?

0.15; 0.075, 0.075.

And finally...I think that the very high CR's some monsters have been given according to your system, makes some of their abilities moot.

Handled through the relationship between CR and EL.

I'm thinking primarily of SR. A red dragons SR of 32 is worth jack if it's CR is 56! The same can be said for a Pit Fiend, to a lesser degree.

The point at which a monster represents a moderate challenge it should get beaten.

Though if I was assigning SR I would have it at HD + 12 (as per the Design Parameters).

It is especially true for almost ALL the epic monsters (CR 90 Atropal, anyone?).

At CR 90 it is a moderate challenge. Try it against a party of 45th-levelers.

Now, I know that CR and EL are differently related in your system, but still.

The dragon's SR give it +2.2 CR, but it really doesn't help it, not at CR 56 where it won't make any challenge and certainly not use up 20% of resources, and not really at CR 28 where it should be 50/50

1. The dragons SR hardly impacts its EL at all.
2. I didn't assign the SR, I simply rated it.
3. Dragons do not live by SR alone.

Any 28th lvl mage worth his salt will bypass SR 32 each and every time.
What I mean is, the SR's in the MM are based on WotC's CR system. Your system makes SR worthless for quite a lot of baddies, I think.
Comments?

Give them SR based on HD +12.

Of course this reduces the SR of some of the outsiders in the MM but technically their problems all stem from having a low proportion of their CR derived from HD - making them inherantly more fragile.

I'm looking forward to your replies, and to digging even deeper into the system!

Appreciate the feedback mate!

Later,

Cya.