log in or register to remove this ad

 

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


log in or register to remove this ad

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Drow Jones said:

Hi there Drow Jones! :)

Drow Jones said:
A long time lurker de-cloaking... :)

Well you have to de-cloak before you can fire. ;)

Drow Jones said:
FRCS has Dark Elves, Duergar (both +2) and Svirfneblin (+3) and no extra HDs.

Well the CRs for those creatures were for their Monster Manual entries.

Drow Jones said:
Or am I misunderstanding your question? :eek:

Well I think what you might be after is the Racial Traits for those two races:

Drow: +1.106 (+0.1/Level*)
Svirfneblin: +1.583 (+0.1/Level*)

*Spell Resistance

Drow Jones said:
BTW, congrats on v4. Keep up the great work! We can't wait for Immortals Handbook... :D

Thanks a lot. I appreciate the support mate. :)

Drow Jones said:
PS: You've propably read Steven Erikson's Malazan Book of the Fallen -series? If not, I recommend it highly for everyone interested in epic campaigns.

I haven't read them but I will definately ask for them next time I am at the library. Thanks.
 

Wulf Ratbane

Adventurer
UK-- Here's an alternative that is quite a bit quicker:

ENCOUNTER LEVELS FOR MULTIPLE OPPONENTS

1. Total all of the CR's of all creatures.

2. Find the EL of this CR using table 2-1.

3. Adjust this EL according to the number of creatures using table 2-3. HOWEVER, do not ADD to the EL, SUBTRACT the EL:

1 = EL -0
2 = EL -2
3 = EL -3
4-5 = EL -4
6-7 = EL -5

continue using the table...

For some mixed groups that are on the "cusp" of a particular CR/EL break, this method can be off by 1. [EDIT] However, this is probably a bit more accurate, as you don't have the effect of multiple "rounding down."

Example:

1 Great Wyrm Red Dragon (CR59)
3 Balors (CR28, +84CR)
10 Vrock (CR13, +130 CR)
14 Babau (CR8, +112 CR)
Total creatures 28, Total CR = 385

Table 2-1: CR 385 = EL 35

Table 2-3: 28 Creatures, EL - 8

Final EL = 35 - 8 = EL 27
 
Last edited:

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Wulf Ratbane said:

Hiya mate! :)

Wulf Ratbane said:
I have found a bit of a discrepancy I was hoping you could help out with.

Fire away.

Wulf Ratbane said:
It seems to me that the EL of a mixed group of NPCs is different depending on whether they are "monsters" or "players characters."

If they are monsters, it seems we find their EL by considering them a "mixed group;" in a mixed group, the EL is always at least as great as the highest level "base" creatures EL. You can't reduce EL by "mixing" a group.

Okay, I am with you so far.

Remember of course that PEL is always four less than EL.

eg. A 24th-level character (on its own) would be PEL 15; whereas a 24th-level opponent would be EL 19.

A difference between PEL and EL of +4 constitutes an even 50/50 encounter remember.

Wulf Ratbane said:
The same is not true of the process presented for Party Level. In this case, you are advised to add all character levels, divide by the number of characters, then apply the result to table 2-1. In this case, the highest level character's EL is actually reduced from where it should be. Any lower level characters in the party drag down the overall EL.

For an example, take a 20th level character and his 12th level cohort.

Using the "mixed group" method this combo would have an EL of 100% + 33% of the highest EL (CR20, EL18; CR12, EL 15, EL-3 of the highest EL).

I confess, at this point, I'm not exactly sure what the EL of this mixed group is. (The instructions are unclear...) But, we can definitely see that the EL will be at least as high as the EL for the 20th level character.

The EL would be 18.

You need 150% before you get +1 EL, as per Table 2-4.

Technically you would be at about EL 18.66 but its EL 18 we use.

Wulf Ratbane said:
Using the second method, the party level is (20+12)/2, or 16th, with an EL of 17. We drag it down even further because there's only 2 characters (PEL -2) to EL 15.

If you do it like this the Average Level is 16.

CR 16 = EL 17, however, remember that multiple opponents (in this case 2) increase EL (by +2 in this case). So you would have EL 19 (17 + 2)

Wulf Ratbane said:
Somehow, using the two different methods, the same two creatures have totally different ELs depending on whether they are a party or an adversary.

Help me out here! Am I doing something wrong?

Using the first methd you get EL 18 (although its about EL 18.66). Using the second method you get EL 19. Not far out.
 


Wulf Ratbane

Adventurer
Wulf said:
Using the second method, the party level is (20+12)/2, or 16th, with an EL of 17. We drag it down even further because there's only 2 characters (PEL -2) to EL 15.

UK said:
If you do it like this the Average Level is 16.

CR 16 = EL 17, however, remember that multiple opponents (in this case 2) increase EL (by +2 in this case). So you would have EL 19 (17 + 2)

But that's not what table 2-5 says to do. Table 2-5 says that my PEL (for 2 characters) is Party Level - 2. Table 2-5 shows that the "baseline" for PEL is 4 characters. And your examples bear this out: PL 19, 2 characters = EL 15, PL 19, 4 characters = EL 17, PL 19 with 13 characters = EL 20, etc.

UK said:
Using the first methd you get EL 18 (although its about EL 18.66). Using the second method you get EL 19. Not far out.

Not far out... But shouldn't they be exactly the same? I consider this an error.

Using the method I mentioned above, for what it's worth:

Total CR factors (of your example party) = 77. CR 77 = EL 25, adjusted for 4 creatures = EL 21. Four 19th level characters should be equal to EL 21.

This result only holds up to the "mixed groups" analysis, though.

I still can't figure out why the Party Encounter Level should not be identical to the EL of the same 4 "creatures" whether they are the party, or the adversary.

I believe that the error here is in the formula presented in the Party Level section-- you are reducing the effective level of the creatures involved by averaging the CR's across the party. You wouldn't do this to a group of mixed creatures, so I don't see the rationale in doing this to a mixed group of characters in a party.

CR and EL should be constant-- right?


Wulf
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hello again mate! :)

Wulf Ratbane said:
But that's not what table 2-5 says to do. Table 2-5 says that my PEL (for 2 characters) is Party Level - 2.

Yes two less than your EL.

Wulf Ratbane said:
Table 2-5 shows that the "baseline" for PEL is 4 characters. And your examples bear this out: PL 19, 2 characters = EL 15, PL 19, 4 characters = EL 17, PL 19 with 13 characters = EL 20, etc.

Yep.

Wulf Ratbane said:
Not far out... But shouldn't they be exactly the same? I consider this an error.

Its only ever going to be out by mere fractions.

Wulf Ratbane said:
Using the method I mentioned above, for what it's worth:

Total CR factors (of your example party) = 77. CR 77 = EL 25, adjusted for 4 creatures = EL 21. Four 19th level characters should be equal to EL 21.

This result only holds up to the "mixed groups" analysis, though.

I still can't figure out why the Party Encounter Level should not be identical to the EL of the same 4 "creatures" whether they are the party, or the adversary.

I believe that the error here is in the formula presented in the Party Level section-- you are reducing the effective level of the creatures involved by averaging the CR's across the party. You wouldn't do this to a group of mixed creatures, so I don't see the rationale in doing this to a mixed group of characters in a party.

CR and EL should be constant-- right?

It does seem a tiny disparity; though I think either way functions.
 

Wulf Ratbane

Adventurer
I'm gonna have to have you walk me through this one. Let me see if I understand.

Two 20th level player characters
Four 12th level cohorts
10x 1st level henchmen

(I consider this a reasonable party grouping, such as one might find in Piratecat's Story Hour.)

By my calculations, as a mixed group of adversaries, they are EL19. (CR total = 98, CR 98 = EL 27, sixteen creatures adjusts to EL19).

As a party, using your method, they are (98 levels / 16 characters) = Party Level 6.125.

Apply this to Table 2-1 per instructions yields EL 11.

Modify that by the number of characters in the party using Table 2-5 yields a PEL of 15.

So when this group "fights itself" we have PEL 15 vs. EL 19, which according to Table 2-6 means a 50/50 fight.

Did I get that right all the way through?

If so, I think my confusion arises because of your terminology. The "Party Encounter Level" does not mean, as it seems to imply, "The EL of this particular party."

I note that in your explanation to me above you actually make this same mistake.

Rather, PEL means, "The appropriate EL of an encounter designed to be a moderate challenge for this party."

PEL does NOT scale up according to the number of creatures in the group, as you misstated above-- that is to say, we should not apply Table 2-3 to this group. You've already taken care of the number of creatures in Table 2-5.

So to try to sum up and wrap up (unsuccessfully...) and perhaps hint at an easier walkthrough:

The EL of this group is, correctly calculated, at EL19.

A "50/50" matchup for this group is EL 19 (as you would expect).

The appropriate "moderate encounter" for this group is EL 15.

(That could be a single CR12 adversary; or it could be 6-7 CR5 adversaries, or it could be 16-31 CR3 adversaries... etc...)

You could simply find the EL of the group and then apply that result against a chart showing the breakdown:

Encounter EL - Party EL ---> Victory
-12 ---> 99.3%
-10 ---> 98.4%
-8 ---> 96.8%
-6 ---> 93.7%
-4 ---> 87.5%
-2 ---> 75%
+/- 0 ---> 50% (encouter level = party's encounter level)
+2 ---> 25%
+4 ---> 12.5%

Finally, according to my calculations, using your system, the "50/50" fight above (PEL 15 vs EL 19) would be worth Party Level (6th) x 1200 experience points, 7200 xp total, 450 xp per character.

So how'd I do with all that?


Wulf
 

Dark Wolf 97

First Post
Hi there mate!

Ok, in the templates section, something you might want to add is the Demilich and Worm That Walks because you list their CR, but you don't break it down, which would be nice to see.

I think the situational modifiers are a great idea, also I like the design parameters better now.

I saw your post at DiceFreaks, and I do hope you can join us more, and I also think the IH will add alot to the site. And I agree about what you said about the DiceFreaks templates, they are large and VERY open ended, and thus difficult to assess.

Looking forward (as ever) to the IH,
later dude. :D
 

Matrix Sorcica

Adventurer
First comments

Hi there UK!

I've only had just the briefest of a readthrough of v4, but there's already issues which I think need attending.

This is just in a random order and here goes:

A long time ago, I know we were discussing this. I think we found some sort of solution, but I can't remember what. Anyway, what I'm talking about is Spell Resistance. The way your system works now, SR becomes useless and sometimes something of a liability for powerful monsters.

I'll explain: Let's take the ever popular Great Red Wyrm. It has SR 32. According to WotC it's CR 26 = EL 26. According to you it's 59 = EL 24. So in a moderate 20% resources encounter, a spell caster needs a 6 or higher to overcome SR (according to WotC). According to you, the party will be lvl 56-63, which makes the SR useless.
And here's the funny part. The useless SR has actually increased the CR of the dragon, thereby insuring that the party that defeats it will be higher lvl and therefore a even more superiour opponent. Since the SR is useless anyway, the dragon would have been better off with out SR!
This is even more true when the CR interval of a given EL is in the hundreds.
Comments? Solutions?

Also, a long time ago in a galaxy far far away you told me how to use the system with the treasure tables in the DMG. Well, I've forgotten and I can't seem to find any guidelines in the pdf. So what to do? As far as I can tell, one can't just use one with the other or am I missing something?

And speaking of treasure. What the hell is going on with the wealth?! According to the DMG, a 10th lvl character should have 49.000 gp worth of treasure. According to your system he should have 100.000 gp! That's just ridiculous!
Sorry. No offense intended. But I think this is a major rewrite of the core rules to fit your system. It will make it hard to use published adventures as the treasure there is (rightly) based on the values in the DMG.
How come you pass out so much treasure?
As a side note, if the treasure didn't represent so much value, at least at mid lvlls, you might be able to lessen the CR adjustment of wealth, so that the silver rule wouldn't be nessecary. If wealth was lower and was a + 0.1/lvl adjustment, characters wouldn't be at 116% power. Or maybe they would. Just some ideas I'm rambling off....

I don't understand the DR table. What's the difference between no elements and no elements (hardness). The effect is the same, right?

And I would pleeeease like your help with this one. I would like to keep the +1, +2, +3 notation for DR for some creatures.
For example, I think the DR for dragons is stupid. At the lvls where dragons get DR, everyone has a magic weapon. Who cares if the dragon has 20/magic or 200/magic? So I really liked your old system where each plus reduced the DR and I will be keeping and using that. So my question is, can I use the CR adjustments from v.3 and add those on top of the new CR modifiers from DR, or have the values changed alot with the new weightings of abilities in generel. Hope I'm making myself clear.

I'm really enjoying the pdf, I think it's great and will allow for some great encounters and players being able to play all sorts of races/monsters. However, some of the CRs seems low if you want to use them for ECL. Will you please explain to my non-troll playing players, how come one of them can be a fullfledeg full powered troll with PC equipment at 7th lvl??? Take a walk, human fighter.....

Please don't take these comments the wrong way. They are merely things I think needs adressing so that this great system can be even greater!

Okay, back to the pdf.

Sorcica
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hiya mate! :)

Wulf Ratbane said:
I'm gonna have to have you walk me through this one.

Sure.

Wulf Ratbane said:
Let me see if I understand.

Two 20th level player characters
Four 12th level cohorts
10x 1st level henchmen

(I consider this a reasonable party grouping, such as one might find in Piratecat's Story Hour.)

By my calculations, as a mixed group of adversaries, they are EL19. (CR total = 98, CR 98 = EL 27, sixteen creatures adjusts to EL19).

As a party, using your method, they are (98 levels / 16 characters) = Party Level 6.125.

Apply this to Table 2-1 per instructions yields EL 11.

Modify that by the number of characters in the party using Table 2-5 yields a PEL of 15.

So when this group "fights itself" we have PEL 15 vs. EL 19, which according to Table 2-6 means a 50/50 fight.

Did I get that right all the way through?

Thats correct! :)

Wulf Ratbane said:
If so, I think my confusion arises because of your terminology. The "Party Encounter Level" does not mean, as it seems to imply, "The EL of this particular party."

I think I see what you are getting at.

Wulf Ratbane said:
I note that in your explanation to me above you actually make this same mistake.

Rather, PEL means, "The appropriate EL of an encounter designed to be a moderate challenge for this party."

PEL does NOT scale up according to the number of creatures in the group, as you misstated above-- that is to say, we should not apply Table 2-3 to this group. You've already taken care of the number of creatures in Table 2-5.

So to try to sum up and wrap up (unsuccessfully...) and perhaps hint at an easier walkthrough:

The EL of this group is, correctly calculated, at EL19.

A "50/50" matchup for this group is EL 19 (as you would expect).

The appropriate "moderate encounter" for this group is EL 15.

(That could be a single CR12 adversary; or it could be 6-7 CR5 adversaries, or it could be 16-31 CR3 adversaries... etc...)

You could simply find the EL of the group and then apply that result against a chart showing the breakdown:

Encounter EL - Party EL ---> Victory
-12 ---> 99.3%
-10 ---> 98.4%
-8 ---> 96.8%
-6 ---> 93.7%
-4 ---> 87.5%
-2 ---> 75%
+/- 0 ---> 50% (encouter level = party's encounter level)
+2 ---> 25%
+4 ---> 12.5%

Finally, according to my calculations, using your system, the "50/50" fight above (PEL 15 vs EL 19) would be worth Party Level (6th) x 1200 experience points, 7200 xp total, 450 xp per character.

So how'd I do with all that?

I told you it was easy. :p

PEL simply mimics the way the core rules determine it. Just that they don't explain it, whereas I do.
 
Last edited:

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Dark Wolf 97 said:
Hi there mate!

Hiya Dark Wolf matey! :)

Dark Wolf 97 said:
Ok, in the templates section, something you might want to add is the Demilich and Worm That Walks because you list their CR, but you don't break it down, which would be nice to see.

What about the Paragon or Pseudonatural Templates. :p

There was a question of time and space. I gave people the rules so that I wouldn't have to break down every individual monster; because no matter how many monsters I detail, there are always going to be more.

Dark Wolf 97 said:
I think the situational modifiers are a great idea, also I like the design parameters better now.

Me too. Glad you like them. ;)

Dark Wolf 97 said:
I saw your post at DiceFreaks, and I do hope you can join us more,

Me too, I never seem to have enough time in the day.

Dark Wolf 97 said:
and I also think the IH will add alot to the site.

I hope so.

Dark Wolf 97 said:
And I agree about what you said about the DiceFreaks templates, they are large and VERY open ended, and thus difficult to assess.

It wasn't so much that they were large as much as I was unfamiliar with all the facets of their abilities.

I often think that you guys would be better served simplifying your epic material as well as making it bigger and badder. A lot of the feedback I have received is that the epic rules start to get really complicated; as such I have tried to make everything in the IH as simple as possible ~ especially the divinity templates.

Dark Wolf 97 said:
Looking forward (as ever) to the IH,

As with v4, I may not be on time but I get there in the end. ;)

Dark Wolf 97 said:
later dude. :D

See you later.
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Sorcica said:
Hi there UK!

Hi Sorcica mate! :)

Sorcica said:
I've only had just the briefest of a readthrough of v4, but there's already issues which I think need attending.

Okay fire away, I appreciate the feedback mate.

Sorcica said:
This is just in a random order and here goes:

A long time ago, I know we were discussing this. I think we found some sort of solution, but I can't remember what. Anyway, what I'm talking about is Spell Resistance. The way your system works now, SR becomes useless and sometimes something of a liability for powerful monsters.

I'll explain: Let's take the ever popular Great Red Wyrm. It has SR 32. According to WotC it's CR 26 = EL 26. According to you it's 59 = EL 24. So in a moderate 20% resources encounter, a spell caster needs a 6 or higher to overcome SR (according to WotC). According to you, the party will be lvl 56-63, which makes the SR useless.

And here's the funny part. The useless SR has actually increased the CR of the dragon, thereby insuring that the party that defeats it will be higher lvl and therefore a even more superiour opponent. Since the SR is useless anyway, the dragon would have been better off with out SR!
This is even more true when the CR interval of a given EL is in the hundreds.
Comments? Solutions?

See the Spell Resistance Design Parameter. Its 12 + 1/HD. I advocate you use that. It may change CR slightly but I doubt it would ever noticeably change EL so you can get away with making the change without going to a lot of trouble.

I actually meant to add a note in the Revised CRs about Spell Resistance.

I didn't create the Core Monsters, I only work here. :p

Sorcica said:
Also, a long time ago in a galaxy far far away you told me how to use the system with the treasure tables in the DMG. Well, I've forgotten and I can't seem to find any guidelines in the pdf. So what to do? As far as I can tell, one can't just use one with the other or am I missing something?

Well Anubis had developed a credible system but I thought it was a bit longwinded.

Personally I prefer: CR^3 x 10

But I hadn't tested it enough to be included in v4.

Sorcica said:
And speaking of treasure. What the hell is going on with the wealth?! According to the DMG, a 10th lvl character should have 49.000 gp worth of treasure. According to your system he should have 100.000 gp! That's just ridiculous!

Sorry. No offense intended. But I think this is a major rewrite of the core rules to fit your system.

Either use my system for wealth or use their system for wealth as long as you stick to one or the other you shouldn't have a problem.

My method, certainly works much better at epic levels and gives you a mechanic to play with; whereas the official rules merely give you an arbitrary figure.

Sorcica said:
It will make it hard to use published adventures as the treasure there is (rightly) based on the values in the DMG.

Like I said, as long as you are consistent it shouldn't matter what system you use for wealth.

Sorcica said:
How come you pass out so much treasure?

Actuall its only really more at mid levels, it keeps a much tighter rein on epic level wealth.

Sorcica said:
As a side note, if the treasure didn't represent so much value, at least at mid lvlls, you might be able to lessen the CR adjustment of wealth, so that the silver rule wouldn't be nessecary. If wealth was lower and was a + 0.1/lvl adjustment, characters wouldn't be at 116% power. Or maybe they would. Just some ideas I'm rambling off....

I would retain the wealth factor as is regardless of which wealth system you use.

Sorcica said:
I don't understand the DR table. What's the difference between no elements and no elements (hardness). The effect is the same, right?

Hardness protects against all physical damage (even from magical attacks).

Sorcica said:
And I would pleeeease like your help with this one. I would like to keep the +1, +2, +3 notation for DR for some creatures.

Okay.

Sorcica said:
For example, I think the DR for dragons is stupid.

I have an optional rule (which may be more to your liking?) whereby a creature gains hardness equal to the Natural Armour bonus it gets from size.

So:

Large +2
Huge: +5
Gargantuan: +9
Colossal: +14
etc.

Sorcica said:
At the lvls where dragons get DR, everyone has a magic weapon. Who cares if the dragon has 20/magic or 200/magic? So I really liked your old system where each plus reduced the DR and I will be keeping and using that. So my question is, can I use the CR adjustments from v.3 and add those on top of the new CR modifiers from DR, or have the values changed alot with the new weightings of abilities in generel. Hope I'm making myself clear.

Lets see.

DR 20/magic = +0.66
DR 20/epic = +1 (of course you have to be an epic monster to get this)

Every 4 points of DR = +0.1
Every Magical '+' = +0.1

DR 20/+1 = +0.6
DR 20/+6 = +1.1

Hows that?

Sorcica said:
I'm really enjoying the pdf, I think it's great and will allow for some great encounters and players being able to play all sorts of races/monsters.

Glad I could help.

Sorcica said:
However, some of the CRs seems low if you want to use them for ECL.

Which ones?

Sorcica said:
Will you please explain to my non-troll playing players, how come one of them can be a fullfledeg full powered troll with PC equipment at 7th lvl???

Take a walk, human fighter.....

Well technically you would be ECL +8 if you added Equipment. (8th-level PC Equipment in this case)

Sorcica said:
Please don't take these comments the wrong way. They are merely things I think needs adressing so that this great system can be even greater!

I appreciate your feedback mate, you know that. :)
 

seasong

First Post
Just wanted to post some love here - I've been drooling over this since v3.

So when can we buy the whole thing from you?

-seasong
 

Matrix Sorcica

Adventurer
Upper_Krust said:
See the Spell Resistance Design Parameter. Its 12 + 1/HD. I advocate you use that. It may change CR slightly but I doubt it would ever noticeably change EL so you can get away with making the change without going to a lot of trouble.

I actually meant to add a note in the Revised CRs about Spell Resistance.

I didn't create the Core Monsters, I only work here. :p

Sounds good and workable. I had just missed the parameter.

Either use my system for wealth or use their system for wealth as long as you stick to one or the other you shouldn't have a problem.

My method, certainly works much better at epic levels and gives you a mechanic to play with; whereas the official rules merely give you an arbitrary figure.

All right, I can accept that. But there should have been a note or something. :)

Like I said, as long as you are consistent it shouldn't matter what system you use for wealth.

Actuall its only really more at mid levels, it keeps a much tighter rein on epic level wealth.

But still....

Hardness protects against all physical damage (even from magical attacks).

aahhh... :eek:

I have an optional rule (which may be more to your liking?) whereby a creature gains hardness equal to the Natural Armour bonus it gets from size.

So:

Large +2
Huge: +5
Gargantuan: +9
Colossal: +14
etc.

But all big creatures get that then. Dragons should be special. Yeah yeah, I know, I can just let this be for badass baddies only. Good rule BTW.


DR 20/magic = +0.66
DR 20/epic = +1 (of course you have to be an epic monster to get this)

Every 4 points of DR = +0.1
Every Magical '+' = +0.1

DR 20/+1 = +0.6
DR 20/+6 = +1.1

Hows that?

That's great. So should I add this value to the base CR adjustment? So a dragon's 20/+3 would be + 0.8?
And if I said that a Balor (DR15/cold iron and good = + 0.75) was DR15/+3, cold iron and good, I would then add +0.2 to CR?
(A +2 cold iron and good weapon would still leeve the balor with DR 5).

Well technically you would be ECL +8 if you added Equipment. (8th-level PC Equipment in this case)

No. Accoring to your system, a Troll after the silver rule is CR 6. Add + 1.2 CR for 6 lvls of PC equipment and you got CR 7.2. An extra lvl of wealth makes it 7.4 which is CR/ECL 7.
So?

I appreciate your feedback mate, you know that. :)

And I appreciate the system and the replies. :D
 

Clay_More

First Post
Hey Mr. Krust, just downloaded the thing, gonna take me some time to read it all through, but Ill put on my critical glasses.

I like the new layout though, not as confusing as the old one with the double-titles
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hi Seasong mate! :)

seasong said:
Just wanted to post some love here - I've been drooling over this since v3.

As ever I appreciate the love mate. :D

seasong said:
So when can we buy the whole thing from you?

Hopefully in a few short weeks. I really needed to get v4 out of the way before I finished the IH off. Now I can concentrate fully on that.
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hiya mate! :)

Sorcica said:
Sounds good and workable. I had just missed the parameter.

Maybe I should have signposted it better.

Sorcica said:
All right, I can accept that. But there should have been a note or something.

:eek:

Sorcica said:

;)

Sorcica said:
But all big creatures get that then.

I actually think it makes sense, but its not something I would force on DMs.

Sorcica said:
Dragons should be special. Yeah yeah, I know, I can just let this be for badass baddies only. Good rule BTW.

I have my moments. :cool:

Sorcica said:
That's great. So should I add this value to the base CR adjustment? So a dragon's 20/+3 would be + 0.8?

No just +0.2 for the Dragon then.

20/magic is really 20/+1, so you would be adding +0.2

Sorcica said:
And if I said that a Balor (DR15/cold iron and good = + 0.75) was DR15/+3, cold iron and good, I would then add +0.2 to CR?

Yep.

Sorcica said:
(A +2 cold iron and good weapon would still leeve the balor with DR 5).

How so?

Sorcica said:
No. Accoring to your system, a Troll after the silver rule is CR 6. Add + 1.2 CR for 6 lvls of PC equipment and you got CR 7.2. An extra lvl of wealth makes it 7.4 which is CR/ECL 7.
So?

I see where the discrepancy is. You are turning a Monster into a Template. Therefore you have the opportunity to address its Ability Scores more accurately.

Looking at the Monster Manual entry for the Troll you get: +12 Strength; +4 Dex; +12 Con; -4 Int; -2 Wis; -4 Cha. So thats +18 instead of +10 from Large Size.

That brings it up to +8.2 which means when you add 8th-level equipment thats +9.8 which means you are looking at ECL +8 after the Silver Rule (or ECL 10 without the Silver Rule).

I should have added a stipulation that you should never use the Golden Rule for ECL since its only going to confuse people when they start going up levels and negate any possible penalties.

Sorcica said:
And I appreciate the system and the replies. :D

My pleasure.
 


Matrix Sorcica

Adventurer
Maybe I should have signposted it better.

Nah, like I said: I only gave it a quick readthrough, so I don't think you are to blame. ;)

No just +0.2 for the Dragon then.

20/magic is really 20/+1, so you would be adding +0.2

I know. The +0.8 was total. (.6 for 20/magic and +0.2 for an extra /+2 = 0.8 CR)


By using your old system of each plus negating 5 points of DR so that DR is not an all or nothing exercise. This is something I've been toying with and I think is a good idea.

So, the balor has DR 15/cold iron and good. In my campaign the balor has DR 15/+3, cold iron and good. So is a weapon isn't cold iron and good, DR 15 applies. If the weapon is cold iron and good, it is at least +1 as well. Then I'm using your old rule of each plus negating 5 points of DR. So against a +1 cold iron and good weapon the balor has DR 10. See?
So is the CR adjustment the same as you've stated or would you rate it differently now that you (I hope ;) ) see what I'm getting at. I'm thinking that I could use the system as is, and just add + 0.1 per plus.

I see where the discrepancy is. You are turning a Monster into a Template. Therefore you have the opportunity to address its Ability Scores more accurately.

Looking at the Monster Manual entry for the Troll you get: +12 Strength; +4 Dex; +12 Con; -4 Int; -2 Wis; -4 Cha. So thats +18 instead of +10 from Large Size.

That brings it up to +8.2 which means when you add 8th-level equipment thats +9.8 which means you are looking at ECL +8 after the Silver Rule (or ECL 10 without the Silver Rule).

I should have added a stipulation that you should never use the Golden Rule for ECL since its only going to confuse people when they start going up levels and negate any possible penalties.

No, I am not turning a monster into a template. I don't understand what you mean. I don't think the golden rule is relevant for a troll as character discussion.
What I'm doing is i'm taking a Troll (CR 6 by the silver rule and I won't ignore that rule when it comes to comparing power between players) and adding equipment for a PC. That makes it CR 7 point something which is ECL 7. So your troll is a 7th lvl character. For arguments sake, lets say ECL 8. Please try and convince my players that this isn't overpowered.
To me it makes no difference if a troll has +10 on stats compared to a large creature. Cause I'm not making a template. I'm taking a troll as is and adding PC equipment and getting ECL 7. Can you help me out?

I remain, as always, your obedient and most annoying rules lawyer.
 
Last edited:

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top