Revised Challenge Ratings/Encounter Levels (pdf)

[Upper_Krust]

July - its official

Hi all!

AV commented in this thread about the SRD update.

http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=865618#post865618

Looks like July.

If the ELH is updated first it would be possible for me to release the grimoire (section 2) and possibly the bestiary (section 3) prior to the main rules.

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

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

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

You don't need to. That's the point. I'm talking about *value* of treasure. How that value is spent is nonimportant for this question.
But again, is the average value of treasure for a dragons (½)CR included in the CR 56? And for the rest of the monsters in the pdf?

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

Sorry, I don't get that. Do I then figure in that value in the dragon's final CR?

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

Well, I think you better

Ability Scores do affect ECL.

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

good

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

also good

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.

My mistake, I forgot about the +1.2. Still, +1.45 for using heal at will seems wrong when regen 1 would be +2.1 ECL.
I really like your CR Calculation system, but I feel that CR and ECL costs need to be different for certain abilities. Now, I'm aware of the heated discussion regarding fast healing and regen, but those abilities are not the only ones that need careful consideration concerning ECL, IMO.

0.15; 0.075, 0.075.

Thanks. What about my question of caster lvls above 20?

Handled through the relationship between CR and EL.


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).

I disagree. The SR is all but useless at the given CRs. Yes, the creature should be beaten, but it should still represent a 20% resource cost at the given CR/EL. Since the SR becomes useless, it shouldn't affect CR. At the CR where the monster should be a 50/50 encounter, the SR is almost useless as well, as I pointed out in my previous post.

I just find it wrong that SR should affect CR when it won't help the creature...actually you could say that it works against the creature. SR raises the CR, thereby making the creature's would-be attackers more powerful (higher CR) and the SR won't help it. Without the SR (that doesn't help it anyway) it would have a lower CR and thus meet weaker oppposition. Am I making any sense?

I'm not sure HD+12 is the solution, though it sounds okay. The dragons SR will still be worthless, even though its CR would increase by +2 (and thus the party would be 58th lvl and give it an even bigger thrashing......).

Besides, I really don't like that one has to change a monster's entry in the MM to make it work with this system.

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

I don't remember the Atropal's SR, but I think that my points above are valid here as well.

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.

No, but without SR they won't live long at all. I know that you just rated it, and that it doesn't affect its EL very much. But, and this leads to my true point, I just realise:
A 56th lvl party might be EL 24 as the dragon is, but any 56th lvl spellcaster is going to ignore the SR. Ditto for a 28th lvl caster. Somehow the check for SR needs to be related to EL instead of lvl, otherwise the huge ranges in CR versus EL is going to make SR useless.
For example, as CRs increase, there might be a span of 50 lvls or so that still equates to the same EL. But 50 lvls are pretty important when determining whether SR is effective or not. So one party equal to EL 30 might easily defeat a creature's SR, but another party equal to EL might need a 19 or 20! See what I mean?
I am very curious as to what you think of these observations.

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.

Hm...would make the dragon's SR almost unbeatable by a 28th lvl party (the 50/50 encounter), and still useless against the 56th lvl party, even though the dragon would now be CR 58.

I think the problem is that CRs and ELs are so much closer in the core rules, so that the dragons SR is effective at all (well, almost)the EL's where a party is supposed to meet a great wyrm red dragon (lvls 19-30).

Agree about the wuzz outsiders. I always beef them up, normally by giving extra HD or almost max hp.

Appreciate the feedback mate!

Anytime - looking forward to your replies.

 

[kreynolds]

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.

How's that SR look against a group of 30th level characters? CR 56 vs PL 56 is not a big deal, at least not traditionally. That's not a particularly challenging encounter, so I wouldn't expect its SR to be through the roof.

 

[Anubis]

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

Ability Scores do affect ECL.

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

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

UK, I hope you're talking about racial modifiers to ability scores and NOT the standard array/rolled ability scores. Otherwise you defeat the whole damn purpose of not including them in CR!

To be honest, I don't think there should be ANY ECL modifiers. CR should equal ECL, plain and simple. A creature of any specific CR is supposed to equal to a character of that level. To give an ECL on top of that would make such creatures look more powerful and would gauge them as more powerful than they should be. What is the sense in saying that an ogre is equal to a Level 4 PC human but not a non-classed PC ogre? Don't make sense . . .

Better yet, use the troll. Suddednly, the troll is equal to a PC of the same level but NOT to the PC troll? Sounds a bit silly.

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.

I thought you hated being arbitrary? This sounds like a dreadfully arbitrary to me. Not only that, but it kills treasure earnings at low levels to the point where PCs can't keep up with your numbers for wealth. Under your system, PCs will still genereally be facing things of nearly equal CR until the extremely high levels (100+). Treasure is assigned based on the CR where the monster is a 20% challenge, not a 50/50 challenge.

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

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

To be honest, I don't think there should be ANY ECL modifiers. CR should equal ECL, plain and simple. A creature of any specific CR is supposed to equal to a character of that level. To give an ECL on top of that would make such creatures look more powerful and would gauge them as more powerful than they should be. What is the sense in saying that an ogre is equal to a Level 4 PC human but not a non-classed PC ogre? Don't make sense . . .

Better yet, use the troll. Suddednly, the troll is equal to a PC of the same level but NOT to the PC troll? Sounds a bit silly.

But the CR for the Ogre and Troll are based on size as well, which include some higher than core races stats. So a non-classed ogre is equal lvl 4 PC etc.
I'm talking about if the ogre had 20 int, 20 wis and 20 cha fx, since that is not included in the CR for size.

(sure hope I'm getting UK's system right....

later,

 

[Upper_Krust]

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

Hi Sorcica mate!

You don't need to. That's the point. I'm talking about *value* of treasure. How that value is spent is nonimportant for this question.
But again, is the average value of treasure for a dragons (½)CR included in the CR 56? And for the rest of the monsters in the pdf?

No, because the outlining of wealth does not necessarily equate to equipment.

Sorry, I don't get that. Do I then figure in that value in the dragon's final CR?

If you determine items from the treasure that the dragon is using then by means all factor them to CR.

My mistake, I forgot about the +1.2. Still, +1.45 for using heal at will seems wrong when regen 1 would be +2.1 ECL.
I really like your CR Calculation system, but I feel that CR and ECL costs need to be different for certain abilities. Now, I'm aware of the heated discussion regarding fast healing and regen, but those abilities are not the only ones that need careful consideration concerning ECL, IMO.

Indeed, SLAs are ever a thorny subject.

Thanks. What about my question of caster lvls above 20?

I'll look into it, but if we change it we inevitably change the dynamic of the +1 CR/Level which is probably not a good idea.

I disagree. The SR is all but useless at the given CRs. Yes, the creature should be beaten, but it should still represent a 20% resource cost at the given CR/EL. Since the SR becomes useless, it shouldn't affect CR. At the CR where the monster should be a 50/50 encounter, the SR is almost useless as well, as I pointed out in my previous post.

So what you're saying is not only do I have to completely fix CR and EL but I also have to revise the entire monster manual (and every subsequent monster book).

I just find it wrong that SR should affect CR when it won't help the creature...

But it doesn't affect EL.

actually you could say that it works against the creature. SR raises the CR, thereby making the creature's would-be attackers more powerful (higher CR) and the SR won't help it. Without the SR (that doesn't help it anyway) it would have a lower CR and thus meet weaker oppposition. Am I making any sense?

Yes, but the effect upon EL is negligable.

I'm not sure HD+12 is the solution, though it sounds okay. The dragons SR will still be worthless, even though its CR would increase by +2 (and thus the party would be 58th lvl and give it an even bigger thrashing......).

It wouldn't affect EL at all.

Besides, I really don't like that one has to change a monster's entry in the MM to make it work with this system.

You don't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.

No, but without SR they won't live long at all. I know that you just rated it, and that it doesn't affect its EL very much. But, and this leads to my true point, I just realise:

A 56th lvl party might be EL 24 as the dragon is, but any 56th lvl spellcaster is going to ignore the SR. Ditto for a 28th lvl caster. Somehow the check for SR needs to be related to EL instead of lvl, otherwise the huge ranges in CR versus EL is going to make SR useless.
For example, as CRs increase, there might be a span of 50 lvls or so that still equates to the same EL. But 50 lvls are pretty important when determining whether SR is effective or not. So one party equal to EL 30 might easily defeat a creature's SR, but another party equal to EL might need a 19 or 20! See what I mean?
I am very curious as to what you think of these observations.

We had this debate six months ago, if people want to use that idea then go for it.

Incidently I think I have just solved one of the problems I had with the idea. I suppose I could always add this in as an optional idea - just like Damage Reduction.

Hm...would make the dragon's SR almost unbeatable by a 28th lvl party (the 50/50 encounter), and still useless against the 56th lvl party, even though the dragon would now be CR 58.

So this 56th-level party is going to be packed with single class spellcasters?

I think the problem is that CRs and ELs are so much closer in the core rules, so that the dragons SR is effective at all (well, almost) the EL's where a party is supposed to meet a great wyrm red dragon (lvls 19-30).

Agree about the wuzz outsiders. I always beef them up, normally by giving extra HD or almost max hp.

What you could have is for monsters to have their HD represent half their CR and then have SR = HD + 12.

Anytime - looking forward to your replies.

 

[Upper_Krust]

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

Hello mate!

UK, I hope you're talking about racial modifiers to ability scores and NOT the standard array/rolled ability scores. Otherwise you defeat the whole damn purpose of not including them in CR!

Yes.

I thought you hated being arbitrary? This sounds like a dreadfully arbitrary to me.

How? NPC character wealth is half PC wealth so why not have NPC treasure treated the same.

Not only that, but it kills treasure earnings at low levels to the point where PCs can't keep up with your numbers for wealth. Under your system, PCs will still genereally be facing things of nearly equal CR until the extremely high levels (100+). Treasure is assigned based on the CR where the monster is a 20% challenge, not a 50/50 challenge.

How, when many of the Monster CRs are much higher...?

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

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

No, because the outlining of wealth does not necessarily equate to equipment.

If you determine items from the treasure that the dragon is using then by means all factor them to CR.

Okay, that makes sense. BTW, most intelligent monsters use their wealth for equipment, right? (at least they do in my world...)

Indeed, SLAs are ever a thorny subject.

Indeed. Any solutions?

I'll look into it, but if we change it we inevitably change the dynamic of the +1 CR/Level which is probably not a good idea.

I can see that. Maybe let the creature get bonus feats as a equivalent spellcaster? (i.e. every 3rd lvl for wiz and sor)

So what you're saying is not only do I have to completely fix CR and EL but I also have to revise the entire monster manual (and every subsequent monster book).

If you don't mind

But it doesn't affect EL.


Yes, but the effect upon EL is negligable.


It wouldn't affect EL at all.

No, but don't you see that some parties will have an easy time at that EL while other parties will have a very hard time - even though they are both the same PEL?

You don't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.

So this 56th-level party is going to be packed with single class spellcasters?

Not necessarily, I think 2 will do the job...

What you could have is for monsters to have their HD represent half their CR and then have SR = HD + 12.

yeah, that should do it.

right back at ya

 

[Upper_Krust]

Optional Spell Resistance

Hi all!

A number of people have commented that Spell resistance should be tied to Encounter Levels rather than Challenge Ratings (or Hit Dice I suppose).

But until recently I wasn't happy with how this affected certain feats (spell penetration; greater spell penentration or [epic] improved spell resistance etc. or indeed similar divine abilities) and magic items.

However, let me know what you think of this solution:

All spell resistance is equal to challenge rating.
All spell penetration is equal to caster level converted directly to challenge rating.

Then you convert everything to Encounter Level and use the difference needing a base 11 to penetrate (+/- EL difference)

eg. 20th-level Wizard with spell penetration and greater spell penetration feats. SP = 24 (which converts to CR 24) = EL 19.

Barbazu = CR 11 = EL 14
Pit Fiend = CR 27 = EL 19
GW Red Dragon = CR 56 = EL 24
Atropal = CR 90 = EL 26
Hecatonchiere = CR 126 = CR 28

The 20th-level wizard needs:

6 to affect Barbazu (75% chance)
11 to affect Pit Fiend (50% chance)
16 to affect GW Red Dragon (25% chance)
18 to affect Atropal (15% chance)
20 to affect Hecatonchiere (5% chance)

Any comments?

One problem is how SR is then factored to CR. My initial idea would be that it increases EL by one. Which we can reverse engineer to find the CR modifier.

eg. GW Red Dragon is CR 54 (EL 23) without factoring SR. But applying SR makes it EL 24 (and arguably CR 62 since at that measure of power EL is increased every 8 CR).

Any more comments?

Personally I really like both solutions, brings back a 1st Ed. dynamic.

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

I like it too.
It may be a little math intensive, though. Not sure how to handle that.
It also takes away the certainty for high lvl casters that they'll defeat a certain SR everytime (if I remember correctly, the wiz would beat the Barbazu's SR every time?) - which I feel is pretty cool. That helps keeping SR valuable, even if it's low andstatic (fx a succubus's SR 12).

Good work, mate!

When will we see a 4th edition of the pdf? Or will there just be the final version in the IH?

BTW, any idea as to the prize of the IH? Can't wait! Damn annoying that I only recently have discovered this system

Later,