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

[Cheiromancer]

I like to draw a distinction in this system between being accurate and being pedantic.

This borders on the pedantic.

Hey! I said, and I quote:

I am not suggesting that the principle of 1 PC level = +1 CR be abandoned. It's a useful approximation. I'm just saying that if you recalculate class ratings with the recognition that the proficiencies are front-loaded, you can see why low level fighters shine in relation to low level wizards, but that the situation is reversed at higher levels.

As you note, it doesn't make that much difference. And anyway, low level characters need all the help they can get to survive. I just noticed that U_K's system is useful for understanding other features of the game. I'm sorry if my observation was taken otherwise!

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Wulf mate!

Frankly, I find the entire Silver Rule to be damn near useless (no offense intended). I don't think the system needs that level of "accuracy,"

Wouldn't that be like painting the Mona Lisa then drawing moustache and glasses on her...

especially since it's only as accurate as UK's completely arbitrary breakdown of each class ability's design factor.

Arbitrary!?

ARBITRARY!?

I SAY THEE NAY!!

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Wouldn't that be like painting the Mona Lisa then drawing moustache and glasses on her...

Well, no-- thought I explained myself.

The Silver Rule isn't going to have an impact on EL very often. It's going to mean a difference in CR of 3 points, maximum-- at CR 20, and will never impact EL more than +/- 1 EL, and then (usually) only if the CR in question is on the bottom end of the CR range for a given EL and doesn't round back up anyway.

For a difference of 1 EL, I'd just as soon put a comment in the Situational Modifiers as go through all the trouble and maths that the Silver Rule entails.

"Statistically, PCs enjoy about a 16% edge over monsters. If you wish to compensate for this inherent game bias in favor of the PCs, occasionally challenge them with encounters +1 EL over the recommendations."

Wulf

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Wulf mate!

Well, no-- thought I explained myself.

...I was just having a bit of fun mate!

The Silver Rule isn't going to have an impact on EL very often. It's going to mean a difference in CR of 3 points, maximum-- at CR 20,

Equal to 30 points of ability scores though.

and will never impact EL more than +/- 1 EL, and then (usually) only if the CR in question is on the bottom end of the CR range for a given EL and doesn't round back up anyway.

True, but it is in there for the creation aspect as well. Not to mention proper ECL.

For a difference of 1 EL, I'd just as soon put a comment in the Situational Modifiers as go through all the trouble and maths that the Silver Rule entails.

"Statistically, PCs enjoy about a 16% edge over monsters. If you wish to compensate for this inherent game bias in favor of the PCs, occasionally challenge them with encounters +1 EL over the recommendations."

That would certainly work of an arbitrary fashion.

But I think we should retain the Silver Rule for ECL and actual Creation.

 

[Upper_Krust]

I meant to add I am about two-thirds through the revised CRs (incorporating ability scores).

It seems to me that all monster ECLs = CR -1* and all character CRs = ECL +1*.

*due to Standard Array.

 

[Cheiromancer]

Wouldn't the value of regeneration depend on what can overcome it?

Nothing overcomes the Tarrasque's regeneration, so it is worth 0.1 per point. But what about a Troll's regeneration, which is overcome by fire and acid? How much is it worth?

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

Equal to 30 points of ability scores though.

True, but it is in there for the creation aspect as well. Not to mention proper ECL.

That would certainly work of an arbitrary fashion.

But I think we should retain the Silver Rule for ECL and actual Creation.

Krust, I so much agree with you.
After going through all the hassle of ability scores and convincing you to include them, the silver rule is really needed to calculate proper ECL (and not just for scores)

I'm not sure I understand your last post about CR-1 = ECL for monsters and CR+1 = ECL for characters

BTW, I'm really sorry that I haven't gotten back to you with some revised CR's. I've been very busy at work and socially (not to say this forum isn't social , but if you still need L-O, and maybe some others, please tell me and I'll send them your way sometime sunday.

Cheers,

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Krust, I so much agree with you.
After going through all the hassle of ability scores and convincing you to include them, the silver rule is really needed to calculate proper ECL (and not just for scores)

Hmmm... I suppose it is my "scientific method" getting the better of me.

Ability scores correlate directly to CR. You should include them. They are applicable outside of the framework of character classes-- and the character classes is what the Silver Rule is attempting to compensate for.

The "Silver Rule" is based on a lot of arbitrary calculations that for some reason didn't make it into the rest of the CR factors-- you can't go into the full list of CR factors and build a "cleric," for example; the only place where this information exists is in the Design Parameters section.

I want to know where the figure "Hit Dice: d4 = CR +0.083" comes from. Accuracy down to the thousandth decimal point? And I hate that this section "averages" the cost of abilities across 20 character levels. You don't "average" the cost of a feat across the first 20 Hit Dice for creatures... And so on.

So basically, it seems you're piling assumptions on top of assumptions and then making a calculation afterwards to make all the data "fit." It just doesn't smell right and doesn't pass the scientific method.

If I have a party of all clerics, does that mean that I need to adjust the Silver Rule to determine this party's "true" EL? What if they are all rogues? The Silver Rule would make a given EL even harder on rogues.

Is that level of "accuracy" necessary?

No.

The only character-class assumption that should be made is 1 Character Level = 1 CR. It is one of the founding "theses" of the entire system. Why you would make that assumption up front, then go on to completely disprove it doesn't make any sense.

Anyhow, my opinion is that the system is stronger without it. UK knows I intend to use his EXCELLENT work (let's remind everyone that I LOVE it) in one of my own products, but the Silver Rule won't be making the cut. It pretends to present accuracy, but instead all it does is inject mathematical uncertainty and cut the legs out from under one of the starting premises.

Wulf

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Cheiromancer mate!

Wouldn't the value of regeneration depend on what can overcome it?

Nothing overcomes the Tarrasque's regeneration, so it is worth 0.1 per point. But what about a Troll's regeneration, which is overcome by fire and acid? How much is it worth?

Interesting point.

Perhaps it would be worth instigating a Table of modifiers not unlike my treatment of Damage Reduction.

Thanks for the feedback mate, much appreciated.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey Sorcica mate!

Krust, I so much agree with you.
After going through all the hassle of ability scores and convincing you to include them, the silver rule is really needed to calculate proper ECL (and not just for scores)

Absolutely.

I'm not sure I understand your last post about CR-1 = ECL for monsters and CR+1 = ECL for characters

Its pretty simple.

A single Level PC with the standard array of stats is approx. CR 2 (+1 for level, +1 for stats*).

*+0.9 actually but for the sake of brevity...

eg. 1st-level character
ECL 1
CR 2 (That includes typical racial mods as well)

Therefore a monster (whose stats are based on a 10.5 average) will always be -1 ECL less than its CR.

eg. Orc with Elite stats (standard array)
CR 2
ECL 1

BTW, I'm really sorry that I haven't gotten back to you with some revised CR's. I've been very busy at work and socially (not to say this forum isn't social , but if you still need L-O, and maybe some others, please tell me and I'll send them your way sometime sunday.

Thanks mate. I appreciate the people who helped with about fifty (of which only about half were incorrect*) of the revised CRs leaving me only a measly 600 or so to do myself.

*

Even though I swore I would never touch them again there only ever was going to be one person capable of handling such a deadly mission...unfortunately.

The only comfort I can take is that I'd like to think the few of you who tackled revising some CRs have a better appreciation for your Uncle Krusts abilities. Even though this latest revision is a mere trifle compared to determining the entirety of the CRs to begin with.