SRD Additions

[CRGreathouse]

You have to choose, wether you prefer level 108 PC that gain nothing from defeating a CR100 monster, or to differentiate CR and ECL. Exteding the table so that PC can gain Xp from monster several CR under or above them is quickly impossible (lack of space on the book).

U_K's system does many things, none of which address the problem you point out. I like U_K (from what I know of him) and his system is well-thought, but this isn't one of its features.

What's more, it wouldn't be hard to give XP from monsters several CR under or over in either system.

After laying a smackdown I should be allowed at least one quip to lighten the mood!

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi CRGreathouse mate!

In that case, the problem is that you assume CR and ECL to be equivilent (requiring only translation). Read Monte Cook's article for an example of a CR +2, ECL +15 (or somesuch) creature.

I've read Monte's article before (and again just there). Everything he says makes sense* - but I don't see how that unduly affects our current discussion at all!?

Its simply requires the deployment of common sense when allowing PC Monsters.

*Incidently did you also know that Monte believes the Solars CR should be 25/26 as well?

I agree - why move the mountain to Mohammed? Instead of tearing down the perfectly workable CR system and making your system incompatible, why don't you change one small aspect of epic XP?

But I haven't 'torn down' anything! I simply added one rule to modify Challenge Ratings at high levels.

 

[Nightfall]

Uhm yeah I hadn't sent it YET but I'll do that right now!

 

[CRGreathouse]

I've read Monte's article before (and again just there). Everything he says makes sense* - but I don't see how that unduly affects our current discussion at all!?

In your article, you say that the ECL mod (or LA) is equal to the CR adjustment. I'm saying this is not correct.

If you wrote that as a gloss or as a special case, or if you think differently now, I have no issue. Otherwise, how could this be correct?

But I haven't 'torn down' anything! I simply added one rule to modify Challenge Ratings at high levels.

Your mod is more far-reaching than that. It totally invalidates comparison between your numbers and the ELH's numbers.

You assume characters gain less power per level than the ELH assumes. As a result, an ECL 4 monster in your system would be no match for a CR 40 from the ELH, but a CR 40 monster from your system would easily defeat a CR 40 monster from the ELH.

*Incidently did you also know that Monte believes the Solars CR should be 25/26 as well?

Yes. You're both right. I'd have to playtest to find out excatlyu where; I suspect it's closest to 24.5.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi guys!

You have to choose, wether you prefer level 109 PC that gain nothing from defeating a CR100 monster, or to differentiate CR and ECL. Exteding the table so that PC can gain Xp from monster several CR under or above them is quickly impossible (lack of space on the book).

U_K's system does many things, none of which address the problem you point out. I like U_K (from what I know of him) and his system is well-thought, but this isn't one of its features.

I think Blacksad is refering (?) to the point that monsters well beneath (or above) the PCs ECL can still represent a potential threat (or possible victory) for the PCs.

eg. Party of x4 60th-level PCs
Under my auspices each represents CR 35 (Group CR39 = 50/50 chance encounter)

Therefore they could still be threatened by creatures/encounter of CR 27 (ECL 34 min.). Likewise they could themselves threaten up to a CR 43 opponent/encounter (ECL 111 max.). A single opponent of CR 39 (ECL 79 max.)

So (for 60th-level characters) that represents an encounter scale between ECL 34-111.

What's more, it wouldn't be hard to give XP from monsters several CR under or over in either system.

But that won't address the whole problem.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hello again mate!

Uhm yeah I hadn't sent it YET but I'll do that right now!

I just received it! At first glance it looks like you got the Challenge Rating spot on - or at least thats what I would have given it!

But I'll email you back when I have more time later tonight/early tomorrow!

 

[Nightfall]

K! I can't wait for you to give your thoughts as always. Right now working on something else. But I think you'll like it.

 

[Psion]

You have to choose, wether you prefer level 108 PC that gain nothing from defeating a CR100 monster, or to differentiate CR and ECL.

Or you can do like me, and dispense with calculating XP from CRs altogether.

I pretty much use CRs (and EL) only to eyeball difficulty of an encounter -- something that they do modestly well at low levels, but owing to differing party capabilities and tactics, don't do so well at once you start advancing. Once you are in epic level, I think the CR scale is rougher than ever, and the DM will have to take the party's capabilities into account more than ever.

 

[CRGreathouse]

I think Blacksad is refering (?) to the point that monsters well beneath (or above) the PCs ECL can still represent a potential threat (or possible victory) for the PCs.

eg. Party of x4 60th-level PCs
Under my auspices each represents CR 35 (Group CR39 = 50/50 chance encounter)

Therefore they could still be threatened by creatures/encounter of CR 27 (ECL 34 min.). Likewise they could themselves threaten up to a CR 43 opponent/encounter (ECL 111 max.). A single opponent of CR 39 (ECL 79 max.)

So (for 60th-level characters) that represents an encounter scale between ECL 34-111.

Yes, but the power level of what you call ECL 34-111 is no different from the power level of what I call CR 27-43. There's no fundamental difference there.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hello again mate!

In your article, you say that the ECL mod (or LA) is equal to the CR adjustment. I'm saying this is not correct.

Firstly, I didn't address 'LA'. ECL means Effective Character Level.

If ECL is different for Monster Races/Templates used as PCs (as Monte suggests, and I agree with) then thats something that should be detailed at the appropriate juncture.

Essentially what you would need are two ECLs.

However, as I mentioned before I don't see this unduly affecting my system (notably so the higher you ascend).

If you wrote that as a gloss or as a special case, or if you think differently now, I have no issue. Otherwise, how could this be correct?

It wasn't a 'gloss' just not something I saw as a dominant or frequent factor.

Your mod is more far-reaching than that. It totally invalidates comparison between your numbers and the ELH's numbers.

Remember firstly that my System arrived before the ELH and is derived from the Core Rules.

You assume characters gain less power per level than the ELH assumes.

Actually I assume that level progression is generally consistent.

As a result, an ECL 4 monster in your system would be no match for a CR 40 from the ELH, but a CR 40 monster from your system would easily defeat a CR 40 monster from the ELH.

As I mentioned before - its going to be a week or so before I pick up the ELH. But here is my take on some of the CRs of the playtest doc.

Abomination:
Anaxim ECL 40/CR 30......they say CR 22
Atropal ECL 62/CR 35......they say CR 30
Chichemec ECL 32/CR 26......they say CR 21
Dream Larvae ECL 43/CR 30......they say CR 31
Infernal ECL 42/CR 30......they say CR 26
Hecatonchiere ECL 113/CR 44......they say CR 50
Phaethon ECL 61/CR 35......they say CR 34
Phane ECL 40/ CR 30......they say CR 25
Xicecal ECL 67/CR 36......they say CR 36

Yes. You're both right. I'd have to playtest to find out excatlyu where; I suspect it's closest to 24.5.

As long as you are within 1 or 2 points you shouldn't have problems in game.