Subtle Brilliance...

[Wulf Ratbane]

A creature is calced out to be CR9 and then multiplied by 2/3 for CR = 6. This checks as "officially correct". A player runs one of these creatures as a character (or equivalently runs a standard L9 character). Because he is a character his CR is not run through the 2/3 rule and remains 9. Right?

You're not exactly looking at it right.

Imagine taking all of the CR factors in the guide and multiplying them by 2/3 EXCEPT for Character Levels.

CR9 was never "correct" for the monster since the CR factors were really only adding up to CR6. You were never building a true 50/50 critter.

As a matter of convenience (that happens to work out nicely when put to the test) we always assume 1 CL = 1 CR (regardless of whether that character level is actually a PC or is tacked onto a monster). We do not break character levels down into their components (so we never have to ask ourselves, for example, why the cost of a feat is not constant from character to monster).

Ultimately you're dealing with fractions of a percent of CR.

Wulf

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Quick question. Why does stunning fist now need an action point? Couldn't the times per day work just as well?

Many abilities that were x/day were switched to action points to encourage the use of action points.


Wulf

 

[BryonD]

You're not exactly looking at it right.

Imagine taking all of the CR factors in the guide and multiplying them by 2/3 EXCEPT for Character Levels.

CR9 was never "correct" for the monster since the CR factors were really only adding up to CR6. You were never building a true 50/50 critter.

As a matter of convenience (that happens to work out nicely when put to the test) we always assume 1 CL = 1 CR (regardless of whether that character level is actually a PC or is tacked onto a monster). We do not break character levels down into their components (so we never have to ask ourselves, for example, why the cost of a feat is not constant from character to monster).

Ultimately you're dealing with fractions of a percent of CR.

Wulf

I don't follow this.

Why not just reduce the costs by 2/3 across the board (except classes) and get rid of the 2/3 rule?

If I make a character with abilities and make a monster with the same abilities, it costs the characer more. So, the character ends up a higher CR even though they have the exact same abilities, thus by definition should be a 50/50 fight.

You say that my monster was never CR9. Fine, I can see that. Why is the identical character CR9? The character is no more effective in a single combat than the monster.

Edit: And I understand the GM responsibility arguement. But I want to understand this from simple math and logic POV.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I don't follow this.

Why not just reduce the costs by 2/3 across the board (except classes) and get rid of the 2/3 rule?

Which list of factors would you rather add up:

0.1
0.2
0.5

or

.0666666666666666666666666666666666666
.1333333333333333333333333333333333333
.3333333333333333333333333333333333333

If I make a character with abilities and make a monster with the same abilities, it costs the characer more. So, the character ends up a higher CR even though they have the exact same abilities, thus by definition should be a 50/50 fight.

You can't make a character and a monster with the exact same abilities. If you make a monster with the exact same abilities-- you've made a character.

But let me ask your question in a slightly different way.

Let's say we take two opponents, a character and a monster. They are both (in their own way) CR10.

Now to both we add 3.0 of identical CR factors (that would be a lot). The character adds +3.0. The monster adds (3.0)(2/3) = +2.0

Your question now is, why is the character CR13 and the monster is only CR12?

The answer to that is balance: The character will face tougher "moderate" challenges and he'll earn less XP.

Obviously, we're treading into the territory of GM responsibility now.

 

[Turanil]

I am convinced that all these CR, ECL, and other factors are a good thing to properly run balanced adventures. But when I read all of this, I can only conclude that making the calculations is only good to get a headache.

I just hope that Slavelords of Cydonia will already include the CR, XP awards and else, so I can't spare myself bothering about it.

 

[BryonD]

Which list of factors would you rather add up:

0.1
0.2
0.5

or

.0666666666666666666666666666666666666
.1333333333333333333333333333333333333
.3333333333333333333333333333333333333

That is just convention.

You can't make a character and a monster with the exact same abilities. If you make a monster with the exact same abilities-- you've made a character.

That is my point. A 50/50 fight should not include a distinction between a monster and a character.

But let me ask your question in a slightly different way.

Let's say we take two opponents, a character and a monster. They are both (in their own way) CR10.

Now to both we add 3.0 of identical CR factors (that would be a lot). The character adds +3.0. The monster adds (3.0)(2/3) = +2.0

Your question now is, why is the character CR13 and the monster is only CR12?

The answer to that is balance: The character will face tougher "moderate" challenges and he'll earn less XP.

Obviously, we're treading into the territory of GM responsibility now.

I really want to set aside GM responsibility. Does the math work or not is the question.

If the character and monster are an exact even match, then by defintion they are a 50/50 fight. And further, they must be the same CR.

It sounds like you are increasing the characters CR for the same reason WotC lowers Dragon CRs. To artificially fudge their combat potential.

If CR=CR means a 50/50 fight, then it should be a truism.
If you THEN want GM responsibility to come in, say so and provide guidance there. But I do not see it as a good idea to cloud the matter by having the meaning of CR being variable.

 

[Cheiromancer]

We do not break character levels down into their components (so we never have to ask ourselves, for example, why the cost of a feat is not constant from character to monster).

Grim Tales doesn't, but Upper Krust does.

Though Upper Krust begins with the assumption that 1 character level = 1 CR, he ends up inflating it. He gets the average value of a character level to be equal to 1.15 CR; he also includes modifiers for having above average ability scores (higher than 10.5). And really, what player character has ability scores that aren't significantly higher than 10.5?

Suppose you use a 28 point buy to purchase a character with ability scores 16, 14, 14, 12, 10 and 10. That's an average of 12.6, so its +2.1 CR over the base value of level x 1.15. At 6th level the CR would be 9.0 (6*1.15+2.1). Treating the character as CR 6 is equivalent to multiplying its UK calculated CR by 2/3. To be fair you have to multiply the opponent's CR by 2/3 as well.

Higher level characters will typically have a higher point buy. A 9th level character with 32 point buy (16, 14, 14, 14, 12 and 10, say) might have a +2.8 CR from ability scores, and thus a base CR of (9*1.15+2.8) = 13.15. To treat such a character as CR 9 is equivalent to multiplying by 2/3 (actually 0.684). To be fair you need to multiply the opponent's CR by 2/3 as well.

At higher levels you end up discounting opponents too much if you use the 2/3 rule, and so don't award quite as much experience, and might slay a character a trifle more often than expected. At 20th level (with 32 point buy) you might award only 3/4 the correct experience; hardly game-breaking.

The system will begin to break down at very high levels- if you are 250th level you might want to calculate the character's CR according to UK's calculation, and not just assume it is CR 250. But as I have absolutely no experience talking about those levels, I'm just going to shut up.

So I would accept the 2/3 rule as a good generalization for countering UKs inflation in CR scores; since he inflates the value of characters about as much as monsters there is going to be very little noticeable game effect from doing so.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

If the character and monster are an exact even match, then by defintion they are a 50/50 fight. And further, they must be the same CR.

It sounds like you are increasing the characters CR for the same reason WotC lowers Dragon CRs. To artificially fudge their combat potential.

I understand your point.

I like to get double duty out of the CR calculations (a predictor of success and a determinant in XP awards) and I can certainly see how you could consider that "wrong."

You could, instead, maintain two seperate totals: a character's CR from Character Level, and a separate total of additional CR.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Grim Tales doesn't, but Upper Krust does.

Not exactly, no he doesn't. He gives a summary at the end of his work to sort of break it down, to justify the 1:1 core assumption on which the system is predicated, but nothing that rises to the level of the monster CR calculator.

His system will not allow you to "build" a character piecemeal, as you can with monsters and the usual assortment of monster abilities. He does not provide support for building "A character with Fighter BAB, 2 good saves, sorcerer spellcasting, alignment restrictions..." etc.

The list of character-building factors is exactly two: character levels, and levels of wealth. (To this you can add other factors, including ability scores.)

And really, what player character has ability scores that aren't significantly higher than 10.5?

A bit off topic: I find it funny that we all know this anecdotally, yet the core system is built around the "statistical average" of 10.5.

Higher level characters will typically have a higher point buy.

Just going to correct you quickly though this isn't a discussion I really want to go down. Higher level characters DON'T have a higher point buy as additional ability scores from advancement (4th, 8th, etc.) is already factored in.

So I would accept the 2/3 rule as a good generalization for countering UKs inflation in CR scores; since he inflates the value of characters about as much as monsters there is going to be very little noticeable game effect from doing so.

If the question is, "Does the math work?" this is the YES answer.

You can't stay awake at night worrying about it something that is built upon assumption after assumption after assumption. Is 1 CL = 1 CR "correct?" Is the 2/3 rule "correct?" Is the cost of +0.2 for a feat "correct?"

The only proof of this tool is through play, and YES it plays well. Bryon, I hate to default to this defense again (because you know I love the numbers as much as you do-- enough to pay to see them work-- but at some point you just gotta go with the T-LAR method and play the game.

Wulf

 

[BryonD]

I understand your point.

I like to get double duty out of the CR calculations (a predictor of success and a determinant in XP awards) and I can certainly see how you could consider that "wrong."

You could, instead, maintain two seperate totals: a character's CR from Character Level, and a separate total of additional CR.

OK, But please explain how you are getting double duty.
Because, for purposes of XP awards, CR no longer = CR, the system no longer provides a reliable predictor of success.

Example: I show you two creatures that are CR6 and CR8. One or both may be characters or monsters, but I'm not telling. I know exactly what their stats are, so I know the "true" odds of a fair fight. Because you have added uncertainty into CR, you can not predict success off of these CRs.

You are correct that a RAW CR for a success perdictor could be one value and an XP CR for awards would be a solution.

I'd still offer that Table 14-3, and therefore Table 14-4, are based on probability of success, and therefore on the RAW CR. Thus using XP CR will underrate an encounter. An EL-4 (moderate encounter based on true CR calculations) would be EL-5 (moderate/easy) after you adjust. Thus, even though the true resource demand of the encounter is 25%, it is treated as less and the characters get less XP. Thus, they need 20 encounters expected to drain 25% of their resources each in order to gain a level, instead of 13.333.