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

[Upper_Krust]

Hi all!

What do you think of this?

9.08 Fast Healing
CR +0.1/point of Fast Healing

eg. Marut (Fast Healing 10) = CR +1

9.15 Regeneration
CR +1/1st point of Regeneration
CR +0.08/additional point of Regeneration
If Regeneration has any elements which negate it: CR x1/2

eg.
Tarrasque (Regeneration 40: nothing negates) = CR +4.12
Troll (Regeneration 5: acid and fire negate) = CR +0.66

I'm still not happy with either.

 

[ciaran00]

Was charging the regen guy without material weaknesses for the cleric spell always on too expensive?

ciaran

 

[Roman]

Hi all!

What do you think of this?

9.08 Fast Healing
CR +0.1/point of Fast Healing

eg. Marut (Fast Healing 10) = CR +1

9.15 Regeneration
CR +1/1st point of Regeneration
CR +0.08/additional point of Regeneration
If Regeneration has any elements which negate it: CR x1/2

eg.
Tarrasque (Regeneration 40: nothing negates) = CR +4.12
Troll (Regeneration 5: acid and fire negate) = CR +0.66

I'm still not happy with either.

I do not like it too much, because the additional points of Regeneration are 'cheaper' than additional points of fast healing. That should not be the case - they probably ought to 'cost' the same in terms of CR, in fact even additional points of regeneration should be slightly more 'expensive' than fast healing, but marginally enough so that the effect can probably be disregarded. Hence CR +0.1/additional point of Regeneration would be fine.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi ciaran mate!

Was charging the regen guy without material weaknesses for the cleric spell always on too expensive?

The Regenerate spell has an instantaneous duration how could it be 'Always on'?

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Roman mate!

I do not like it too much, because the additional points of Regeneration are 'cheaper' than additional points of fast healing. That should not be the case - they probably ought to 'cost' the same in terms of CR, in fact even additional points of regeneration should be slightly more 'expensive' than fast healing, but marginally enough so that the effect can probably be disregarded. Hence CR +0.1/additional point of Regeneration would be fine.

What about:

9.08 Fast Healing
CR +0.075/point of Fast Healing

eg. Marut (Fast Healing 10) = CR +0.75

9.15 Regeneration
CR +1/1st point of Regeneration
CR +0.1/additional point of Regeneration
If Regeneration has any elements which negate it: CR x1/2

eg.
Tarrasque (Regeneration 40: nothing negates) = CR +4.9
Troll (Regeneration 5: acid and fire negate) = CR +0.7

 

[CRGreathouse]

I do not like it too much, because the additional points of Regeneration are 'cheaper' than additional points of fast healing. That should not be the case - they probably ought to 'cost' the same in terms of CR, in fact even additional points of regeneration should be slightly more 'expensive' than fast healing, but marginally enough so that the effect can probably be disregarded. Hence CR +0.1/additional point of Regeneration would be fine.

I disagree. Regen 1/Fast Healing 9 is better than Regen 10, since the fast healing can heal even the lethal damage (while regen can heal only the subdual).

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi CR mate!

I disagree. Regen 1/Fast Healing 9 is better than Regen 10, since the fast healing can heal even the lethal damage (while regen can heal only the subdual).

Surely thats an irrelevant point though; given that creatures with Regeneration treat all damage as Subdual except for listed elements which negate the Regeneration.

In effect, Regeneration (after the first point and with no suppressing elements I mean) is slightly superior than Fast Healing (if we treat both as Extraordinary) since Regeneration will still work after you are 'dead'; whereas Fast Healing wouldn't. Unless we are to assume that Fast Healing is still in operation even if a creature (with Regeneration) was torn to shreds but still regenerating. In which case both should be equal after the first point.

The only questions which then beg asking are the difference between standard regeneration and that which has one or more suppressing elements, and indeed the relationship between one suppressing element and multiple suppressing elements.

Any other thoughts on that?

On a side note, I would still argue that Regeneration is actually Supernatural (even though the core rules attest differently); but I won't impose those beliefs onto the system.

 

[CRGreathouse]

Surely thats an irrelevant point though; given that creatures with Regeneration treat all damage as Subdual except for listed elements which negate the Regeneration.

Yes, but Fast Healing will heal damage from those listed elements, too.

In effect, Regeneration (after the first point and with no suppressing elements I mean) is slightly superior than Fast Healing (if we treat both as Extraordinary) since Regeneration will still work after you are 'dead'; whereas Fast Healing wouldn't. Unless we are to assume that Fast Healing is still in operation even if a creature (with Regeneration) was torn to shreds but still regenerating. In which case both should be equal after the first point.

That is the case -- a 100-hp creature dealt 1000 points of cold damage when it has regen/fire and acid has 1000 subdual damage, which is healed by both regeneration and fast healing.

The only questions which then beg asking are the difference between standard regeneration and that which has one or more suppressing elements, and indeed the relationship between one suppressing element and multiple suppressing elements.

Any other thoughts on that?

I agree that that's the big issue, but I don't have any great insights for you. Sorry.

I like the new suggestion for regeneration, though; it gives real value to Regeneration 1 (which is much better than Fast Healing 1) without making Regeneration 1000 that much more expensive than Fast Healing 1000.

 

[Gez]

Hiya Craig,

Just a little question -- have you received my response to your mail about RTD's monsters?

I ask because I havn't got any response about the mails I sent to various peoples in the last several days, so I wonder if I havn't a little technical trouble.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Can anyone help me out!?

Hi all!

Can anyone remember my formula for determining the Experience Points Total for any given level!?

eg. At 10th-level a character has a total of 45,000 EXP

I have a formula for this but I can't (for the life of me) remember it, nor can I seemingly work it out anymore!?

The whole situation is very annoying, I want it to check something with regards Treasure.

I know I gave it to a few people on these boards but I can't remember who, what, why, when, where or how. Bloody memory!

Hiya mate!

I agree that that's the big issue, but I don't have any great insights for you. Sorry.

I am sure I will get it soon.

Hiya Craig,

Hey Gez mate!

Just a little question -- have you received my response to your mail about RTD's monsters?

I ask because I havn't got any response about the mails I sent to various peoples in the last several days, so I wonder if I havn't a little technical trouble.

Yeah I got it thanks.