Revised CRs/ECLs continuation thread

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Dark Wolf mate!

Personally I think fire immunity shouldn't stop all fire. Ever heard of Divine Fire damage? Huh?

Like a Phoenix...even though they handle it slightly differently.

Oh...right...probably not, but fire done by a diety of fire should only be stopped by an equal or greater diety, not some puny-@$$ mortal with a Ring of Fire Immunity.

Exactly, the Fire Portfolio (or whichever) has to mean something otherwise it means nothing.

 

[Anubis]

Argh! *Resisting Urges To Kill*

UK, how do you put up with those two without losing your cool?

Seriously.

The lack of . . . Never mind, I am doing my best not to blow my top right now.



Good grief. Like I said, I will not debate that any longer. In the end, two people disagreeing means nothing. I will just let it be. UK, those two are all yours!

Argh!

 

[demiurgeastaroth]

Argh! *Resisting Urges To Kill*

UK, how do you put up with those two without losing your cool?

Seriously.

The lack of . . . Never mind, I am doing my best not to blow my top right now.



Good grief. Like I said, I will not debate that any longer. In the end, two people disagreeing means nothing. I will just let it be. UK, those two are all yours!

Argh!

Aaaah.
<basks in warm glow of satisfaction>


Darren

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Anubis mate!

Argh! *Resisting Urges To Kill*

UK, how do you put up with those two without losing your cool?

Seriously.

I don't even know who you are talking about?

Am I in the right thread?

 

[Sonofapreacherman]

Argh! *Resisting Urges To Kill*

When Anubis is left twisting in his own self-induced froth, its a sure sign that you must be on the right track.



-----

Upper_Krust.

Surely they are an EL +3 encounter, rather than a +4 EL (50/50) that you attest.

A party of 4 goblins is a EL 4 encounter. By your own system, CR 0 = EL 0; 4 opponents = +4 EL. Therefore 4 goblins = EL 4 (not EL 3 as you claim).

Why do you not see this? Because it does not suit your argument to do so? Goblins and hobgoblins should not be rated identically.

It tells me that due to the dangers inherent in low level play (not perceived by the official rules) that the PCs are now compensated fairly (if not proportionally).

Now it becomes obvious. You are simply operating on the wrong premise. For you, the XP award matches the EL rating. Sure, I'll even agree for the sake of moving this debate along. But then EL does not properly rate the difficulty of lower level encounters.

That might not sink immediately, so try looking at it like this. If you feel that that a CR 4 encounter should award 225 XP to each member of a 1st level party of four, that's fine. It certainly does using your calculations. But then a group of 4 goblins is not a CR 4 encounter, they are not a CR 3 encounter, they might be a CR 2 encounter, but they are probably a CR 1 encounter.

I'll expand on this point even further...

To say that lower levels are inherently fragile is pure sophistry and self-deluded rationalization. Characters are always fragile when faced with superior opponents. Moreover, 1st level characters are not *always* faced with superior opponents (certainly not enough to say they are more inherently fragile than any other level). Lower level parties don't have the monopoly on fragility. A 20th level party is fragile to a very old prismatic dragon.

Fragility is irrelevant to your argument because fragility is universal. It can exist at *any* level. That's the big picture you haven't stepped far enough back to see. Sometimes characters are going to be fragile, sometimes they are not. Not every challenge a 1st level party charges into will bring them face-to-face with their own mortality. That's hogwash. To use your favorite argument ... not if the lower levels are dungeon mastered properly.



You CR system "seemingly" takes fragility into account for higher levels characters by appropriately scaling EL ratings using "increasing" increments. The CR to EL gap steadily widens. Wonderful. As it should be. Now turn around and look in the opposite direction. When you are dealing with lower level characters, those increments should reflect "decreasing" increments. The CR to EL gap should steadily shrink (more than it currently does).

Use the goblins from my above example as your ruler. A party of four goblins should rate CR 1 or CR 2 (at most). The question you should be asking yourself is ... how can your system accurately arrive at those values without arbitrarily dividing/slashing the current lopsided values?

The easiest (most straightforward) approach I can think of is by calculating PC and opponent numbers the same way and scaling the XP awards accordingly. Nothing else would have to change. Now before you start talking about potatoes again )) this idea might not be the solution. It's just my initial thought on the subject. But make no mistake, a solution *is* needed. That's going to mean a few extra calculations, but in all the time we've interacted, you've never struck me as the kind of person who shies away from game mechanic paperwork. Don't start now. You've worked too hard on this ruddy thing.

 

[Eldorian]

A party of 4 goblins is a EL 4 encounter. By your own system, CR 0 = EL 0; 4 opponents = +4 EL. Therefore 4 goblins = EL 4 (not EL 3 as you claim).

Sigh... Math not your strong point? I know I said I would ignore you, but this is just silly. 4 goblins = EL4 is right. UK said 4 goblins is a EL +3 encounter for a first level party. 4-1 is 3.

Now it becomes obvious. You are simply operating on the wrong premise. For you, the XP award matches the EL rating. Sure, I'll even agree for the sake of moving this debate along. But then EL does not properly rate the difficulty of lower level encounters.

That might not sink immediately, so try looking at it like this. If you feel that that a CR 4 encounter should award 225 XP to each member of a 1st level party of four, that's fine. It certainly does using your calculations. But then a group of 4 goblins is not a CR 4 encounter, they are not a CR 3 encounter, they might be a CR 2 encounter, but they are probably a CR 1 encounter.

CR.. CR... You mean EL? Your PCs must be powerful indeed if 4 goblins take them 20% of their resources. Or perhaps you have parties greater than 5 people? Your claim that 4 goblins is as difficult as a single fighter is silly.

I'll expand on this point even further...

To say that lower levels are inherently fragile is pure sophistry and self-deluded rationalization. Characters are always fragile when faced with superior opponents. Moreover, 1st level characters are not *always* faced with superior opponents (certainly not enough to say they are more inherently fragile than any other level). Lower level parties don't have the monopoly on fragility. A 20th level party is fragile to a very old prismatic dragon.

Fragility is irrelevant to your argument because fragility is universal. It can exist at *any* level. That's the big picture you haven't stepped far enough back to see. Sometimes characters are going to be fragile, sometimes they are not. Not every challenge a 1st level party charges into will bring them face-to-face with their own mortality. That's hogwash. To use your favorite argument ... not if the lower levels are dungeon mastered properly.

Um... first level parties have one Hit die. Weapons deal around one die worth of damage at all levels. Only at the first few levels are characters able to be killed in one hit from a melee weapon, barring criticals. They also have limited resources with which to counteract these one hit kills, such as healing spells. Trust me, the only levels at which PC mortality is higher is after save or die spells become prevalent, but by then you have resurrection, so it doesn't matter.

A 20th level is not fragile. They have access to teleportation and true resurection, and a plethera of magic items to save thier butts. Your appeal to the prismatic dragon is childish, btw. It is much more than EL +3, as the golbins were. EL +9 from my calculations. That's high enough for "background only"

And every challege to a first level party, well, that includes a monster capable of dealing around 5-10 points of damage in one round, does make them face up to thier own mortality, because it's quite common for 1st level PCs to only have 5-10 HP at first level.

Eldorian Antar

 

[Anubis]

When Anubis is left twisting in his own self-induced froth, its a sure sign that you must be on the right track.

Taunting me? Well then, consider me back on the job to shoot you down once and for all.

-----

Upper_Krust.

A party of 4 goblins is a EL 4 encounter. By your own system, CR 0 = EL 0; 4 opponents = +4 EL. Therefore 4 goblins = EL 4 (not EL 3 as you claim).

He said EL +3, which is correct. The goblins are EL 4, but the party is PEL 1. That equates to EL +3, see?

Why do you not see this? Because it does not suit your argument to do so? Goblins and hobgoblins should not be rated identically.

Yes they should. They are nearly identical in power. Same AC, nearly the same damage (only a 1 point difference), same hit rate, the hobgoblin is stronger, but the goblin has more special abilities and a greater ranged attack rate. See? They're equal.

Now it becomes obvious. You are simply operating on the wrong premise. For you, the XP award matches the EL rating. Sure, I'll even agree for the sake of moving this debate along. But then EL does not properly rate the difficulty of lower level encounters.

Um, yes it does.

That might not sink immediately, so try looking at it like this. If you feel that that a CR 4 encounter should award 225 XP to each member of a 1st level party of four, that's fine. It certainly does using your calculations. But then a group of 4 goblins is not a CR 4 encounter, they are not a CR 3 encounter, they might be a CR 2 encounter, but they are probably a CR 1 encounter.

What part of "WRONG" do you not understand? Four goblins are an EL 4 encounter. An EL 1 encounter would be a 20% encounter. An EL 5 encounter would be a 50/50 encounter. THROUGH PLAYTESTING, an encounter with four goblins will be difficult for a Level 1 party, CERTAINLY more than a 20% encounter, but not quite a 50/50 encounter. As such, EL 4 is correct through testing.

I'll expand on this point even further...

To say that lower levels are inherently fragile is pure sophistry and self-deluded rationalization. Characters are always fragile when faced with superior opponents. Moreover, 1st level characters are not *always* faced with superior opponents (certainly not enough to say they are more inherently fragile than any other level). Lower level parties don't have the monopoly on fragility. A 20th level party is fragile to a very old prismatic dragon.

Not really. The problem is that low level characters will die in one or two hits. The same thing is not true when putting a Very Old Prismatic Dragon against a Level 20 party. Battles get generally longer as you increase in levels, giving all people a better chance.

Fragility is irrelevant to your argument because fragility is universal. It can exist at *any* level. That's the big picture you haven't stepped far enough back to see. Sometimes characters are going to be fragile, sometimes they are not. Not every challenge a 1st level party charges into will bring them face-to-face with their own mortality. That's hogwash. To use your favorite argument ... not if the lower levels are dungeon mastered properly.

These numbers are meant to allow DMs to DM properly and not put gross challenges against PCs.

You CR system "seemingly" takes fragility into account for higher levels characters by appropriately scaling EL ratings using "increasing" increments. The CR to EL gap steadily widens. Wonderful. As it should be. Now turn around and look in the opposite direction. When you are dealing with lower level characters, those increments should reflect "decreasing" increments. The CR to EL gap should steadily shrink (more than it currently does).

Actually, the math supports the current system. UK can explain, but it will give you a headache.

Use the goblins from my above example as your ruler. A party of four goblins should rate CR 1 or CR 2 (at most).

Actually, I believe a goblin is EL 0 and four goblins is EL 4 . . . That's only if you DM them properly, of course.

The question you should be asking yourself is ... how can your system accurately arrive at those values without arbitrarily dividing/slashing the current lopsided values?

We don't want to arrive at those values. The current values are correct. Playtesting shows this to be true.

The easiest (most straightforward) approach I can think of is by calculating PC and opponent numbers the same way and scaling the XP awards accordingly. Nothing else would have to change. Now before you start talking about potatoes again )) this idea might not be the solution. It's just my initial thought on the subject. But make no mistake, a solution *is* needed. That's going to mean a few extra calculations, but in all the time we've interacted, you've never struck me as the kind of person who shies away from game mechanic paperwork. Don't start now. You've worked too hard on this ruddy thing.

Um . . . No.

 

[demiurgeastaroth]

Note that I'm not commenting on who is right and wrong in this thread, just wanted to observe:

Battles get generally longer as you increase in levels, giving all people a better chance.

In fact, my experience is that this is WRONG (sorry, couldn't resist the caps lock key).
Battles take longer in terms of the time to play it through, because people have a lot more options, but the actual number of rounds doesn't change that much. Obviously some fights will be quick, but I'd say the chance of a really long fight is greater at low levels, when both sides are taking one attack a round and can't hit each other
Ive played through all the levels, and use a computer to track combat so I always know how many rounds a fight has taken. The actual number of rounds doesn't vary that much from low to high. (Though at 1st level, it could be very short, yes.)

Darren

 

[Eldorian]

Average combat length is approximatly 4-5 rounds, at all levels I think. There was a poll done in the general forum. I know that my epic games and my 1st level games have pretty much always 4-5 round combats. There is the odd one where the foes have uber fricken HP and can't hit anyone, so you just sit there and melee them to death instead of wasting valuable spells to kill them, but this isn't the standard case.

Eldorian Antar

 

[Upper_Krust]

Your all clear kid now lets blow this thing and go home

Upper_Krust.

Hiya mate!

You seem to be making a number of clear mistakes (not least challenging my authority ). Also appears you were not willing to reply point by point, but instead replied with another diatribe. No matter, no hiding places left...

A party of 4 goblins is a EL 4 encounter. By your own system, CR 0 = EL 0; 4 opponents = +4 EL. Therefore 4 goblins = EL 4 (not EL 3 as you claim).

Incorrect. I stated that four goblins were EL +3 beyond a typical 1st-level party.

Why do you not see this? Because it does not suit your argument to do so? Goblins and hobgoblins should not be rated identically.

Any difference is negligable as to the effect on their CR.

Now it becomes obvious. You are simply operating on the wrong premise. For you, the XP award matches the EL rating. Sure, I'll even agree for the sake of moving this debate along.

I accept your concession.

But then EL does not properly rate the difficulty of lower level encounters.

That might not sink immediately, so try looking at it like this. If you feel that that a CR 4 encounter should award 225 XP to each member of a 1st level party of four, that's fine. It certainly does using your calculations. But then a group of 4 goblins is not a CR 4 encounter, they are not a CR 3 encounter, they might be a CR 2 encounter, but they are probably a CR 1 encounter.

While the goblins would be fractionally less of a challenge than four 1st-level NPCs, the difference is negligable. I would say they certainly represent the lower end of the CR 1/2 spectrum.

I'll expand on this point even further...

To say that lower levels are inherently fragile is pure sophistry and self-deluded rationalization.

On the contrary its an indisputable fact. Allow me to explain after your next point...

Characters are always fragile when faced with superior opponents.

...and at low level, characters are fragile even when faced with inferior opponents! Something which you fail to recognise.

A single skeleton with a longsword can potentially kill a 1st-level fighter with an 18 constitution in a single hit!

Moreover, 1st level characters are not *always* faced with superior opponents (certainly not enough to say they are more inherently fragile than any other level). Lower level parties don't have the monopoly on fragility.

They do when facing inferior opponents.

A 20th level party is fragile to a very old prismatic dragon.

True a CR 97 dragon would crush such a party, in fact its an impossible (greater than EL +8) encounter.

Fragility is irrelevant to your argument because fragility is universal. It can exist at *any* level.

See above.

That's the big picture you haven't stepped far enough back to see. Sometimes characters are going to be fragile, sometimes they are not. Not every challenge a 1st level party charges into will bring them face-to-face with their own mortality. That's hogwash.

Virtually any opponent* can kill a 1st-level character (I'm sure there are some that probably can't but the majority certainly can) in a single round.

*almost certainly from CR 1/2 onwards.

To use your favorite argument ... not if the lower levels are dungeon mastered properly.

I don't doubt you could keep the PCs alive easily enough if the DM so wished.

You CR system "seemingly" takes fragility into account for higher levels characters by appropriately scaling EL ratings using "increasing" increments. The CR to EL gap steadily widens. Wonderful. As it should be.

Thank you.

Now turn around and look in the opposite direction. When you are dealing with lower level characters, those increments should reflect "decreasing" increments. The CR to EL gap should steadily shrink (more than it currently does).

I still think its pretty much spot on. Of course at 1st-level the PCs will have the max. hp advantage as well.

Use the goblins from my above example as your ruler. A party of four goblins should rate CR 1 or CR 2 (at most).

The question you should be asking yourself is ... how can your system accurately arrive at those values without arbitrarily dividing/slashing the current lopsided values?

One possibility (that I have actually just thought of) may be that CR 1/2 is actually EL -1 (since an additional character adds +2 EL).

Meaning:

CR 1/2 = EL -1 (instead of 0)
CR 1/4 = EL -3 (instead of -1)
CR 1/8 = EL -5 (instead of -2)

But this puts you in the dangerous position of 8-11 1st-level NPCs (as well as 8-11 goblins) being a 50/50 encounter for a party of four 1st-level characters instead of 6-7 1st-level NPCs or Goblins.

However, while that might seem more appropriate for the goblins (who admittedly represent the low end of CR 1/2) it seems an overbearing NPC force.

The easiest (most straightforward) approach I can think of is by calculating PC and opponent numbers the same way and scaling the XP awards accordingly. Nothing else would have to change. Now before you start talking about potatoes again )) this idea might not be the solution. It's just my initial thought on the subject. But make no mistake, a solution *is* needed. That's going to mean a few extra calculations, but in all the time we've interacted, you've never struck me as the kind of person who shies away from game mechanic paperwork. Don't start now. You've worked too hard on this ruddy thing.

I don't plan on changing any fundamentals based on the feedback on this particular topic. Though I am more than willing to address the issue of slowing progression with optional rules.