Revised CRs/ECLs continuation thread

[Upper_Krust]

Re: Re: SR

Hiya mate!

Well, feats matter too much for CRs 1-3, which you can find many creatures with SR, and it's bad at levels 15+, where your feats can sometimes not matter at all. I'd be quite pissed if I had +2 more spell penetration than an ally, yet the EL chart puts us both at the same level for spell resistance penetration.

Something that could only happen at epic levels to begin with and even then it still wouldn't be the case with ever adversary.

After all, I put a precious feat into the ability. As for your singe deific ability.. perhaps it's not the system thats at fault, but how you're rating that ability?

The ability in D&Dg adds 20 points to SR. Of course I reduced that to 10 points in the IH (as per the CR modifier).

The system works fine for epic levels out of the ELH. Explain to me this diefic ability. And why not make a counter diefic ability.

I have its spell penetration counterpart.

But if you are relying on these to penetrate/resist then you are practically maintaining the black or white situations we are trying to avoid in the first place!

After all, I suggested that spell penetration cost half so much as spell resistance. If diefic abilitys grant +1 CR, ie, +10 SR, then you could easily make a diefic ability that grants +20 Spell penetration.

I don't see how that suggestion is valid though!?

 

[Anubis]

Well, energy resistance is eventually worth more than energy immunity by the system.

To be, the actual solution to the resistance/immunity issue is to give resistance a maximum CR value.

OR . . .

For SR, to determine the CR modifier, just use the difference between WotC SR and WotC CR as the modifier. That way it NEVER gets too high. Maybe cap that number at CR +2 (SR +20), since at that point you can't beat it at the assigned level without help from feats and the such.

Also, you don't have to recalculate so much. I said that was optional. In fact, if THIS way is used, it's not even a factor.

 

[Eldorian]

For SR, to determine the CR modifier, just use the difference between WotC SR and WotC CR as the modifier. That way it NEVER gets too high. Maybe cap that number at CR +2 (SR +20), since at that point you can't beat it at the assigned level without help from feats and the such.

Also, you don't have to recalculate so much. I said that was optional. In fact, if THIS way is used, it's not even a factor.

Exactly. What you just typed is exactly my system, but instead of having SR 10 be a fixed value of "need a 10 to overcome" you have the SR be 10 +EL, and just subtract the EL to determine CR modifier. My system is simplier.

]Originally posted by Upper_Krust

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Eldorian
Well, feats matter too much for CRs 1-3, which you can find many creatures with SR, and it's bad at levels 15+, where your feats can sometimes not matter at all. I'd be quite pissed if I had +2 more spell penetration than an ally, yet the EL chart puts us both at the same level for spell resistance penetration.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Something that could only happen at epic levels to begin with and even then it still wouldn't be the case with ever adversary.

Case in point. I am level 17, with spell penetration. My ally is level 16 without. We both use EL 17 to overcome spell resistance. Not only am I higher level, but I spent one of my precious feats to become better at overcoming spell resistance, to naught. It gets worse in epic levels, as you said. In fact, Epic spell penetration means nothing at level 32 and 33. Thats 3 feats, one of them epic.

]Originally posted by Upper_Krust

I have its spell penetration counterpart.

But if you are relying on these to penetrate/resist then you are practically maintaining the black or white situations we are trying to avoid in the first place!

Sorry mate, but if I spend 3 CR, the equivalent of over 3 character levels (almost 4), to become spell resistant, it damn well better make me nearly immune. Thats almost 4 levels without HD, without BAB, saves, skills, spells, ect.

And if I spend 1 CR, which is over one level's worth of power, without any other benifits, in order to be able to effect nearly magic immune guys, it better work half the time, cause I still have to worry about saving throws, and I didn't gain any other abilites in the process, like spells. This uber spell penetration is the CR equivalnt of BAB +7. Thats another attack, and then some. It better be powerful.

The suggestion is valid because it rates these abilites as what they're worth, not what a min/maxer can get out of them using some sort of deity rules. I may not know how playing a diety works, but I know how to play a PC, and this works for PCs, and it works for monsters. It may be extremely simple for dieties to get on/off SR, and on/off spell penetration, but it sure isn't for PCs, even epic ones, and it's balanced for monsters.

Eldorian Antar

 

[Anubis]

I do not think your systems are much simpler and they certainly are not more accurate. Here is my (revised) system in a nutshell.

Step 1: Find a creatures "SR Factor". SR Factor is the difference between WotC SR and WotC CR. (e.g. Lemure, SR 5, CR 1, SR Factor +4)

Step 2: Calculate UK CR and UK EL. The CR modifierfor SR is determined by dividing the SR Factor from Step 1 by 10 and adding that number to the CR. This modifier is NEVER to exceed CR +2. (e.g. Lemure, Base CR 2.75, SR Factor +4, CR Modifer +0.4, Final CR 3.15, EL 7)

Step 3: Add the SR Factor from Step 1 to the UK EL from Step 2. This is the new SR. (e.g. Lemure, EL 7, SR Factor +4, SR 11)

Step 4: For spell penetration, determine the individual CR of the spellcasters spellcasting levels and use the EL as the spell penetration modifier. For example, a Level 20 Wizard is CR 20/EL 18; for spell penetration, roll 1d20+18. For multiclass characters, count individual spellcasting classes by themselves. For example, a Fighter 15/Wizard 10/Cleric 5 is CR 10/EL 14 as a Wizard and CR 5/EL 10 as a Cleric; for spell penetration, roll 1d20+14 when casting Wizard spells and roll 1d20+10 when casting Cleric spells. All modifiers for feats, deific abilities, etc. are added to the final EL number. I advocate lowering the values of all such abilities, however, to one half their current values. The above Level 20 Wizard with Spell Penetration would roll 1d20+19, and with Greater Spell Penetration, would roll 1d20+20.

As you can see, this is a relatively simple system, and thanks to Eldorian, it is now 100% flawless even with regards to CR modifiers for SR. (I claimed the system itself was perfect before, but remember the CR modifiers were still open to debate as I stated.) I do admit, however, that feats and other such things pertaining to SR and spell penetration may still need to be dealt with, although I think I have covered pretty much everything.

It may not be "quick and easy", but then again, UK's system itself is not "quick and easy" either. This is the most accurate solution of any. This system allows SR to play a role as it should, yet without breaking the system. In addition, my system makes the spellcasting levels of any particular character important (as they should be; a Level 1 Wizard should never have as easy a time as a Level 20 Wizard, even if a Level 100 Fighter) and is very cleanly and easily able to accomidate all situations.

 

[Eldorian]

Sigh.. anubis.. thats my system, with the changes I mentioned, and a new change. that of halving the modifiers from feats...

Eldorian Antar

 

[Anubis]

Sigh.. anubis.. thats my system, with the changes I mentioned, and a new change. that of halving the modifiers from feats...

Eldorian Antar

How is that your system? The two are nothing alike save for the fact that they're both based around EL. I see no other similarities between the two proposals.

 

[Sonofapreacherman]

Here's your first problem. CR 0.15 rounds to 0, which is CR 1/2 and EL 0, so you should recalculate.

If anything, my estimate of CR 1/8 was generous then; CR 1/2 is even worse.

Well then, as this system purports to be accurate, let's hold it accountable.

+0.6 for warrior class.
+0.1 for NPC wealth
–0.75 for small class.

If the goblin advances as class, then no racial ability bonus for darkvision. Accuracy is not to be blurred by solitary arbitrary decisions after all (that would be a reference to you Anubis).

Final CR –0.05 or CR 1/4.

A CR rating of 1/4 awards 150 XP to each party member for defeating 4 goblins; 150 is 200% more than the standard amount of 75 (even worse than my initial estimate of 150%).

If you and Upper_Krust think that doling out 225 XP for these goblins is "okey-dokey" then you have both gone stark raving mad.

The problem here is that the MM underestimates the goblin.

Not by 200% using my assessment, and certainly not by 300% using your arbitrary calculations.

Four goblins are almost a 50/50 encounter, NOT a 20% encounter.

One of us has been eating more than their fair share of Cocoa Puffs, and it's not me. Four warrior goblins are a carpet of squishy meat, even for a group of four 1st level characters.

It is? That's how it's already done in the game! CR/EL +4 is an even match even by the CURRENT rules. You're SUPPOSED to get that much XP for a 50/50 challenge!

Hehe. Once again, your keen recall of the existing rules ... serves absolutely no purpose whatsoever here.

NO NO NO! If you do that, you are no longer properly rating challenges and you are changing everything from the core system ALTOGETHER!

By Jove I think he's got it!

Even by the core rules, CR/EL is based on what is a 20% encounter. This is stated in the book. UK's system simply expands those rules to logical conclusions to give proper XP for encounters.

And so that should be changed. Along with every other sacred-cow of 3rd edition Challenge Ratings. When two identical challenge ratings finally equal a 50/50 encounter, only then will we have an intuitive Challenge Rating system. Everything else can be reverse engineered from there, with, I suspect, far more accuracy at *all* levels; something the majority of DM's, both in my own experience and on these boards, clearly prefer.

-----

Upper_Krust.

I disagree.

...

If you don't want EXP determined as befits the challenge then by all means change it, just don't ask me to agree with what is quintessentially an arbitrary decision.

It's not a matter of disagreement. When you justify that XP is ramped up at lower levels to account for the fragility of low level characters, then you are being arbitrary. When you can design a system that uniformly awards proportionate XP at *every* level, then you are being logically consistent. When you choose not to see logical consistency because it upsets equations that were mistakenly thought to be sacrosanct, then you are being selective.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hiya mate!

Well, energy resistance is eventually worth more than energy immunity by the system.

Immunities can be trumped whereas resistances must be overcome ~ so in some ways resistance is better than immunity.

While this caveat may be an IH-centric thing, its only going to be at epic/immortal levels where the situation occurs that a characters spell resistance or energy resistance or somesuch 'costs' more than similar immunities.

 

[Upper_Krust]

hello mate!

Case in point. I am level 17, with spell penetration. My ally is level 16 without. We both use EL 17 to overcome spell resistance. Not only am I higher level, but I spent one of my precious feats to become better at overcoming spell resistance, to naught. It gets worse in epic levels, as you said. In fact, Epic spell penetration means nothing at level 32 and 33. Thats 3 feats, one of them epic.

Sorry mate, but if I spend 3 CR, the equivalent of over 3 character levels (almost 4), to become spell resistant, it damn well better make me nearly immune. Thats almost 4 levels without HD, without BAB, saves, skills, spells, ect.

And if I spend 1 CR, which is over one level's worth of power, without any other benifits, in order to be able to effect nearly magic immune guys, it better work half the time, cause I still have to worry about saving throws, and I didn't gain any other abilites in the process, like spells. This uber spell penetration is the CR equivalnt of BAB +7. Thats another attack, and then some. It better be powerful.

The suggestion is valid because it rates these abilites as what they're worth, not what a min/maxer can get out of them using some sort of deity rules. I may not know how playing a diety works, but I know how to play a PC, and this works for PCs, and it works for monsters. It may be extremely simple for dieties to get on/off SR, and on/off spell penetration, but it sure isn't for PCs, even epic ones, and it's balanced for monsters.

The whole point of changing Spell Resistance in the first place is to avoid it becoming a black and white scenario at epic/immortal levels. As I see it the changes you propose bring us right back to where we have started - frankly I am starting to wonder if its worth even including optional rules for this at all.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi mate!

If anything, my estimate of CR 1/8 was generous then; CR 1/2 is even worse.

Well then, as this system purports to be accurate, let's hold it accountable.

+0.6 for warrior class.
+0.1 for NPC wealth
–0.75 for small class.

...surely a small creature is -0.5 CR.

Upper_Krust.

Hello!

It's not a matter of disagreement.

Well I'm disagreeing with you so there!

When you justify that XP is ramped up at lower levels to account for the fragility of low level characters, then you are being arbitrary.

Thats simply untrue. As you well know EXP is not arbitrarily 'ramped up' but instead consistent with the CR/EL rules presented.

When you can design a system that uniformly awards proportionate XP at *every* level, then you are being logically consistent.

Consistency is irrelevant when it is inaccurate.

When you choose not to see logical consistency because it upsets equations that were mistakenly thought to be sacrosanct, then you are being selective.

Then stop putting the 'cart before the horse' and show me that the equations are wrong.

The only sacrifice I made to the equation was the EL jump from CR 1 to 2 ~ which should have been +3 (as opposed to +4). Other than that its as accurate as you will get as far as I can see.