• NOW LIVE! -- One-Page Adventures for D&D 5th Edition on Kickstarter! A booklet of colourful one-page adventures for D&D 5th Edition ranging from levels 1-9 and designed for a single session of play.
log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 3E/3.5 v4: Challenge Ratings pdf (3.5 compatible)

Wulf Ratbane

Adventurer
I have three requests:

First, can we perhaps get Kavon to move his discussion to seasong's thread? It really does seem more an application of the system than a discussion of the system itself.

Second, UK, can you explain the Dragons/SR/CR thing a bit more clearly? Some of us were not here for the entirety of the SR discussion. I could really use some context for your answer. Try not to be your usual terse self, I need some understanding! ;)

Third, can someone please post the latest and greatest spreadsheet?


Wulf
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Kavon

Explorer
Wulf Ratbane said:
First, can we perhaps get Kavon to move his discussion to seasong's thread? It really does seem more an application of the system than a discussion of the system itself.
Yes, I was thinking about that too myself. As long as U_K replies to that thread as well, it's alright with me :D
Should I explain the entire thing over again, or just directly move the discussion about it over there?
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hiya mate! :)

kreynolds said:
But those two do not make up the entirety of keen senses. Dragons can also see twice as far as humans in normal lighting conditions as well. Do you not find this aspect of keen sense consequential enough to rate?

Not really, you could and you couldn't I suppose.
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hiya mate! :)

CRGreathouse said:
That looks like a good general guideline. Is there any reason to think it's (HD/5)d6, round up, rather than (say) (HD/6+1)d6, round down?

I thought this was already explained in the back of the Monster Manual under Swarm?

I think its round down.

CRGreathouse said:
Nah. Monsters get racial modifiers, which subsume +1/4 modifiers. Heck, the rat swarm (for example) has the same stats as individual rats, not increased as its 4 HD would indicate if this were the case.

Okay.

CRGreathouse said:
Swams have natural armor as their invividual parts and no more. Not even the 12HD hellwasp swarm gets NA...

Fair enough.

CRGreathouse said:
I'm more than willing to change regeneration and SR, though, as those were basically arbitrary -- crude extrapolations from the number of creatures in the swarm and comparitive increases in other swarms.

Indeed.
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Kavon said:
Hey again U_K :)

Hiya mate! :)

Kavon said:
Let's see...
Magical Training [General] (from the FR campaign setting book)
Prerequisite: Int 10
This gives you two 0th level arcane spells, once per day each, which use the character's arcane caster level (minimum 1) as caster level. This can only be taken at 1st level as well.

Does this seem worth 0.2 CR to you?

No.

Kavon said:
Hmm.. Yeah, I guess. I think me and my players prefer it if spells were individually taken, though.

Okay.

Kavon said:
Hmm.. That last part seems unfinished :eek:
But anyway.. Yeah, I think I could do something like that..
Hmm... How much would 0th level spells be costing like this?
Caster level x Spell level x 0.003 for 3/day.. let's say at 1st level, that would be.. 1 x 0.5 x 0.003 = 0.0015?
A 1st level spell, at 1st level caster level would cost 0.003 CR, or 3 XP?? Isn't that a very low cost?
I think I'll let them increase the caster level individually from character level. Like, if they want to learn a 5th level spell (9th caster level minimum) once per day, that would be 0.045 CR or 45 XP. If they want to increase the times per day by one, the total would become 0.09 CR, or 90 XP. So, they'd need to put another 45 XP in the spell to increase it like that. If they now want to increase the caster level to 10, the total changes to 0.1 CR, or 100 XP, so they'd need to put an extra 10 XP into it.
I'm not sure, but I think some of these results seem pretty low costing (like the increasing caster level to 10 costing only 10 XP).

Its all getting a bit confused.

What about a single spell-like ability equals a feat but you have to take one spell of each preceeding level first (as a prereq.)?

Kavon said:
Now that I'm looking at this.. Shouldn't there be a difference in cost between Always Active and the other ones below it? Having something permanently active seems allot more powerful then only being able to do it 5 (or even 10) times per day. Same goes for At will (though it should be slightly less than always active I guess).

Depends on the initial duration.

Kavon said:
*uses the Force to try and help U_K find the scrap of paper* ;)

I really hate having to go through stuff I have already done and dusted, I need a filing system for my filing system because its a nightmare trying to find anything. :(

I don't think it is really what you are after anyway since you are not reinventing integrated spell progression as much as you are simply wanting a spell buffet.

But if I come across it I will post it.

Kavon said:
Oh, no, I was refering to EN world not working too great at the time. I think I remember reading about you having some problems with your computer though. Glad everything is working again now

:)

Kavon said:
Hmm... But if I let it all out the window on the wealth, wouldn't there be an inbalance after a while? I know at least one of my players likes to go to a town and find the rich neighbourhood to pillage through.. so, the player would end up with loads of wealth to spend (and he will), which would make him allot stronger than his XP total would allow for.
Or did I misunderstand you?

Monetary wealth does not automatically mean magical Equipment. Tone down any sort of magic shop setup you have so that the players can't buy anything at their current measure of power.

Kavon said:
Ah, ok. Sounds good.
Where/how do I find these maximums?

You don't, I made them up.

The average human score is 10-11, best starting human score 18, best 20th-level human score (before magic) 23.

You could say that there is a racial maximum of +12.

Kavon said:

Anytime mate! :)
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hey Wulf mate! :)

Wulf Ratbane said:
I have three requests:

First, can we perhaps get Kavon to move his discussion to seasong's thread? It really does seem more an application of the system than a discussion of the system itself.

Or he can email me. :)

Wulf Ratbane said:
Second, UK, can you explain the Dragons/SR/CR thing a bit more clearly? Some of us were not here for the entirety of the SR discussion. I could really use some context for your answer. Try not to be your usual terse self, I need some understanding! ;)

WotC Dragon SR = CR + 6

U_K Monster SR = HD + 12

If you retain WotCs version then a good parallel between my CR and theirs (for dragons) is 1/2. If you use my version then all monsters (including dragons) can be converted by using the 2/3 method.

Do you need me to explain this further?

Wulf Ratbane said:
Third, can someone please post the latest and greatest spreadsheet?

I have two versions by Xanatos and I cannot view either because there is a flaw in my copy of Microsoft Excel and I need a full reinstall of Microsoft Office. A friend was meant to bring that up on Friday night but he forgot so I may have to wait another few days before I have a working copy of that.
 


kreynolds

First Post
Upper_Krust said:
I have two versions by Xanatos and I cannot view either because there is a flaw in my copy of Microsoft Excel and I need a full reinstall of Microsoft Office. A friend was meant to bring that up on Friday night but he forgot so I may have to wait another few days before I have a working copy of that.

And this prevents you from posting the spreadsheet...how? ;)
 


kreynolds

First Post
Upper_Krust said:
...because xanatos said he didn't want it posted until it was finished/checked.

Gotcha. But, out of curiosity, what does it matter if it's finished or not? Either yourself or Xanatos can answer that. I only ask because I don't see the purpose of "development secrecy", or what have you. Seems kinda pointless in an open discussion.
 
Last edited:

CRGreathouse

Community Supporter
Upper_Krust said:
I thought this was already explained in the back of the Monster Manual under Swarm?

I think its round down.

If it's round down, then none of the swarms listed follow the rule.

I certainly don't see anything explicit in the rMM, and I've read through the section 3 times (twice in the rMM, once in the SRD).

All but one of the swarms in the Fiend Folio follow the (HD/5) round up rule, and the exception has higher damage (that is, it's certainly not rounded down).

Also -- did you see my U-Z CRs?
 
Last edited:

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hiya mate! :)

kreynolds said:
Gotcha. But, out of curiosity, what does it matter if it's finished or not? Either yourself or Xanatos can answer that. I only ask because I don't see the purpose of "development secrecy", or what have you. Seems kinda pointless in an open discussion.

Well xanatos has intimated that he is happy to email his work to interested parties (or have me email it for him, whichever). I just don't think he wants it to go public yet until its checked over (which of course it would have been had I not been having problems with my copy of Excel).

As to why he doesn't reveal such work in progress openly I can only assume is because he would rather not have to respond to 100+ post threads going through the minutiae of every conceivable detail...but then whats the chances of something like that happening. :rolleyes:
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hiya mate! :)

CRGreathouse said:
If it's round down, then none of the swarms listed follow the rule.

Okay my mistake, going by the table it looks like we round up.

I can't be expected to remember everything dude! :p

CRGreathouse said:
I certainly don't see anything explicit in the rMM, and I've read through the section 3 times (twice in the rMM, once in the SRD).

All but one of the swarms in the Fiend Folio follow the (HD/5) round up rule, and the exception has higher damage (that is, it's certainly not rounded down).

Page 316 of the rMM has a mini Table of sorts.

CRGreathouse said:
Also -- did you see my U-Z CRs?

I did see them, thanks.

I haven't had time to fully go over them as yet (or Sorcicas A's) due to my generally busier schedule Friday + Weekend and a healthy barrage of messages and/or emails.

I will get to address them tomorrow when hopefully I can put all this stuff to bed for good.

Sometimes I think I'd have an easier time as a physicist trying to discover the Theory of Everything. :p
 

CRGreathouse

Community Supporter
Upper_Krust said:
Page 316 of the rMM has a mini Table of sorts.

Ah, thanks. Yes, that's certainly a HD/5 round up table, though it's capped at 5d6.

Upper_Krust said:
I did see them, thanks.

I haven't had time to fully go over them as yet (or Sorcicas A's) due to my generally busier schedule Friday + Weekend and a healthy barrage of messages and/or emails.

I'm not sure that mine are actualy correct. On the upside, all of the work (the particular numbers as well as the 'showing work' aspect) is done by an almost-automated Excel file, so it shouldn't be too hard to fix any mistakes.
 

kreynolds

First Post
CRGreathouse said:
On the upside, all of the work (the particular numbers as well as the 'showing work' aspect) is done by an almost-automated Excel file, so it shouldn't be too hard to fix any mistakes.

Heh. Guess I wasn't the only one with that idea. :D Sure helped with the dragon I was working. Those age categories can be a nightmare.

EDIT: Excuse me while I fix this...done.
 
Last edited:

Moobus

First Post
Hello Upper_Krust, everyone! Should probably start by saying this document is a godsend - I almost can't believe how much sense it makes, especially compared to the mess CR is in 3.5.

But I was wondering how well the system scales at very high levels. Looking through the Epic monster CRs, I just don't know that (say) a Hecatoncheire is anywhere near a match for a lone level 100 PC, nevermind a 50/50 opponent. Even a party of fairly standard (read: not min/maxed to hell) level 60 characters should wipe out any monster in the ELH.

Maybe I'm wrong; I've never actually /played/ in a campaign approaching level 30. And I know it's not an issue in practice, but when the first tenet of the system is to make CR equivalent to PC levels, I do get to wondering :)
 

kreynolds

First Post
Moobus said:
Looking through the Epic monster CRs, I just don't know that (say) a Hecatoncheire is anywhere near a match for a lone level 100 PC, nevermind a 50/50 opponent. Even a party of fairly standard (read: not min/maxed to hell) level 60 characters should wipe out any monster in the ELH.

Maybe I'm wrong; I've never actually /played/ in a campaign approaching level 30.

If I've got this right, the Hecatoncheires is an appropriate moderate challenge for a 27th-level party.
 
Last edited:

Wulf Ratbane

Adventurer
kreynolds said:
If I've got this right, the Hecatoncheires is an appropriate moderate challenge for a 27th-level party.

Yep, you got it.

The hecatonchiere (wtf that is...) is CR 111, EL27.

A single 111th level character is EL27.

A party of four 27th level characters is EL27 (CR 108, converts to EL27).

EDIT: I don't know if that's a judgement on whether the system scales upwards or not. I don't really play (or even like) Epic. Blasphemy, I know. ;)

Wulf
 
Last edited:

Moobus

First Post
kreynolds said:
If I've got this right, the Hecatoncheires is an appropriate moderate challenge for a 27th-level party.

It would be moderate for a party with PEL 27, or average character level 96-111...which I think is crazy. A lone spellcaster of that level (or even lower) wouldn't blink an eye, when it should be 50/50. Hell, it's probably not too hard to make a level 100 warrior-type (he'd have /how much/ cash?) with AC the Hecatoncheires can't touch.

I have the impression that everything falls apart at those levels anyway, making an accurate CR even less relavent...but surely there's some way to adjust?

Or am I really crazy and the Hecatoncheires would trounce said characters? I suppose I could try to play a few scenarios out...
 

Wulf Ratbane

Adventurer
Moobus said:
It would be moderate for a party with PEL 27, or average character level 96-111...which I think is crazy.

Don't forget, EL 27 is either ONE 111th level character, or FOUR 27th level characters.

A lone spellcaster of that level (or even lower) wouldn't blink an eye, when it should be 50/50. Hell, it's probably not too hard to make a level 100 warrior-type (he'd have /how much/ cash?) with AC the Hecatoncheires can't touch.

Perhaps this is a better test of the system:

Forget the hecawhatsis.

Do four 27th level characters stand a 50/50 against a lone 111th level character?

Wulf
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top