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
Hi xanatos mate! :)

xanatos said:
Can you tell me where are they? Because that table is incomplete (being a relative table, you can't get the STR of Fine creatures (probably -12 or -14).

Monster Manual 2, page 4. Thats a good table.

xanatos said:
p.3 Size: you forgot that there are monsters without STR and CON... Spectres! (all Undead+Incorporeal creatures don't have STR and CON)

Lack of strength is factored in the Incorporeal Traits.

xanatos said:
p. 7 Golems don't have Magic Immunity, in 3.5, they have Total Spell Immunity... It isn't clear in your rules, does Spell Immunity 0-9 gives you immunity to all spells, or only to spells from level 0 to 9 (no metamagic 9th level spells)

I have read over 3.5 Golems and their description of "Immunity to Magic" is ludicrous. Golems are immune to all magic except where noted in their descriptions as far as I am concerned.

xanatos said:
p.8 Summon: no, MULTIPLY by percentage! (if you divide something by 30%, you get a bigger number)

Okay.

xanatos said:
Shouldn't you use the EL of the creatures or something similar? Surely 10 goblins are not as strong as a CR 10 creature... They are only annoying... Unless the strategy is to slow the enemy! :)

Possibly. Its a complicated

xanatos said:
I think that Turn Resistance should be capped at less than 1.5. Even if you have 20 turn res., you can still be turned and you have other Undead vulnerabilities (there are many nasty clerical spells around, plus Mace of Desruption etc.)

Well personally I would allow up to +20 Turn Resistance for +1 and after that Turn Immunity (for a further +1).

xanatos said:
Immune to SOME Fortitude Saves (for CON = 0)... Disintegrate still works! :-(

...unless it also affects Objects.

xanatos said:
Can you make a Reflex Save with Dex = 0? I'm not sure... I'll have to check. If you are immobile, then you should fail Reflex saves

Let me know

xanatos said:
Is no natural healing a modifier if the construct has fast healing? (is a disadvantage that is not a disadvantage still worth points?)

No.

xanatos said:
Wealth: wasn't the epic wealth rules different from normal ones? Are you using YOUR rules for wealth? Probably yes, but then you should write it clearly! Something like "Morons, I'm using MY wealth rules... Knee before me or DIE!" :)

:D

xanatos said:
Unless you have a whole chapter about wealth rules in your book! :)

Yeah, 60 pages. :p

xanatos said:
Do monsters get the 1 attribute point / four levels for free?

No its rated in their HD.

xanatos said:
p. 20 Can you sell back attributes/move base points between attributes?

If yes, wouldn't it be easyer to simply tell that you start with 63 or 72 "free" points for attributes (55 and 64 if you don't have an attribute)

Interesting idea, I'll have a think. But I think things like elite array do not work out the same as that.
 

Clay_More

First Post
Hey Mr. Krust, yours threads seem to have some Energizer Bunny over them ;)

I read some of the discussion on the subject of adding low CR minions to a high CR encounter (with the example of Skeletons and a Paragon, Great, Wyrm, Fiendish Red Dragon or something). As I think I might have pointed out later on, any system can be broken if taken to the extreme (some systems more than others though. See Epic Spells in ELH for examples).

It wouldn't be bad at all seeing the system put into some form of electronic spreadsheet. If only I hadn't stopped doing Delphi, I could have volunteered, but the knowledge is extremely rusty these days, wouldn't do much good.

And on another note, took the liberty of making a referral or two to the thread, seems most people who post monsters in them D&D forums ask for advice on CR-evaluation. I gotten through the first three converted 3.5 monsters for Necromancers Legacy with the system, hasn't been any incidents yet (CR's ended up what I would expect from playtesting).
 

xanatos

First Post
Can you tell me where are they? Because that table is incomplete (being a relative table, you can't get the STR of Fine creatures (probably -12 or -14).
Monster Manual 2, page 4. Thats a good table.

That table doesn't contain STR, DEX and CON! I'm sure... I have the book!

Do monsters get the 1 attribute point / four levels for free?
No its rated in their HD.

Ok... But PC and NPC classes do get it, right?

Immune to SOME Fortitude Saves (for CON = 0)... Disintegrate still works! :-(
...unless it also affects Objects.
My point was that you wrote "Immune to For saves fullstop" (p. 8) and not "Immune to For saves BUT those that affects objects"

If yes, wouldn't it be easyer to simply tell that you start with 63 or 72 "free" points for attributes (55 and 64 if you don't have an attribute)
Interesting idea, I'll have a think. But I think things like elite array do not work out the same as that.
72 and 64 where with the Elite Array.

--- Bye
 

Kerrick

First Post
No, full spell immunity is treated a CR +5.

Spell Immunity to a single level of spells is +0.5. (Including 0th-level spells that makes 9th-level spell immunity +5).

Ahh. Question: What do you with a spell system that goes above 9th-level spells (like, as someone mentioned, metamagic spells, or the level-based epic spell system our group uses)?

They have fractional CRs in the Monster Manual dude.

Yeah, they have 1/10, 1/8, 1/4, 1/3, and 1/2 - what about the odd ones?

Okay, got my notes now. I didn't miss much the first time, thankfully.

The ability scores rated at 0 isn't totally accurate - it should be a -, since they're unratable.

The layout is very nice, BTW - easy to read, and easy to find stuff, and I especially like how it follows the monster stablock - makes it a lot easier to go down and tally up the mods now.
 

Wulf Ratbane

Adventurer
Upper_Krust said:
No its rated in their HD.

Stop the press...

So are you saying that a creature with 4 HD has to pay an additional cost to raise one attribute by +1?

Or are you saying that cost is subsumed into the cost of his HD. So a creature with 4 HD gets +1 attribute for free, but then pays an additional cost for +2 and beyond? 8 HD would get +2 for free, but pay for +3 an above, etc.


Wulf
 

Matrix Sorcica

Adventurer
I can't make it work!

Hi Krust!

First of all I will start out with a correction :) You rate the Giant type as +0.2 CR because of Darkvision. Only thing is, that was in 3.0. In the MM 3.5 giant type creatures have low light vision and therefore only +0.1 CR ;)
Hope I haven't destroyed your day.

And now please help! Anyone! I have tried to calculate the CR of some creatures and no matter how I try I can't get the numbers UK get. So I must be doing something wrong, wrong, wrong and I don't know what it is....

So if someone would please give me a hand here. Let's start with the Ogre, an old favorite of mine. Krust rate it at 5.225 CR. Here's what I get:

4 giant HD (0.55*4) = 2.2
Large size = 1.2
+5 natural armor = 0.5
Darkvision 0.2
Lowlight vision 0.1
Full Attack (2d8) = 0.9

This totals 5.1 CR. Where does the rest come from? What am I forgetting? And it gets worse when you take into consideration that the Ogre should have a -0.6 CR adjustment for its crappy ability scores, which ends up making the Ogre CR 4.5!
Help!

Next the Doppelganger. Krust rate it at 4.43.

4 monstrous humanoid HD (0.6*4) = 2.4
+4 natural armor = 0.4
Darkvision = 0.2
Change Shape = 0.5
Detect Thoughts (18*2*0.005) = 0.18
Immune to sleep & charm = 0.2
Skill bonuses (+8) = 0.16

This gives 4.04 CR. Now add +1.4 CR for ability scores and you got a full CR more than Krusty's rating.
Help!

Last one, the elf warrior. UK got it at 1.285.

Elf traits = 0.36
Warrior lvl = 0.7
lvl of npc equipment = 0.125

Total = 1.185. Where does the last 0.1 come from?

So I'm confused and admitting it.

Anyone?
 

kreynolds

First Post
UK,

Couple questions about templates. Let's say you have a template that changes your creature type to outsider and adds +4 to Strength. Your monster creation tips suggest allowing outsiders to use the elite array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8) as their base. However, humans use the standard array (13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8). Now, when you're calculating up the CR for the +4 to Strength, do you need to change the assumed array for the character from standard to elite now that they're an outsider? Or do you just ignore that and figure up the CR modifier for the +4 to Strength at +0.4 and call it a day?

Also, since templates do not typically include hit die, how do the golden and silver rules apply to them? Can you only actually apply these rules to the CR of a template _after_ the template has been applied to a creature? It doesn't seem to me that you can apply either rules to the template until you have the base creature's CR to work with as well.

What do you think? Also, over on the Wizard's boards, these questions are also more or less stated here, in my post just above yours.
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hi xanatos mate! :)

xanatos said:
But your list (p.8, 2nd column, upper right) is wrong: You say that Ability Scores from Size factor affect CR... Ok... The Size affect CR... But it gives you free Ability Scores points. Reading what it's written it seems that you have to pay for the +8 STR that Large Size gives you.

You do pay for ability score modifiers within the current (v4) rating of Size.

In fact when a monster didn't have the applicable minimum modifiers I reduced the CR appropriately.

xanatos said:
Then why Natural Armor isn't included in Size? I know that in a perfect world a creature would be the sum of various "layers" of templates... A Race/Type template plus a Size Template plus some generic templates plus the creature.

Maybe it should be included.

xanatos said:
I consider Special Templates (Lich, Half Dragon etc) to be "adders" to the basic creature... You don't create a Half Dragon Half Demon Xyzptl from scratch. You first create a "Xyzptl"... Then you make it an Half Dragon Half Demon Xyzptl. So Special Templates should have attribute modifiers. Size is different. Each creature has a size and you normally don't start thinking a creature as a medium size creature and then enlarging it (or perhaps you could... For humanoid creatures sometimes I do this... I think it as a medium size creature and I ask myself how it would compare to a human... Then I enlarge it)... But many persons directly use the suggested values for creatures of size X, or directly compare it to other creatures (if I want the Yellow Dragon with Blue Spots I take a standard Dragon and I modify it... I don't start from scratch thinking "how would it be if it was a Human?")

Nevertheless, Size is a template in all but name.

Are you saying that ability scores should simply be factored in and of themselves!? Are you going to apply ECL penalties to PCs who roll high ability scores!?
 


xanatos

First Post
Are you saying that ability scores should simply be factored in and of themselves!? Are you going to apply ECL penalties to PCs who roll high ability scores!?
I consider Good Rolls to be Players Helper and, as such, I don't put them in the equation (unless they are TOO much good rolls... Then I know that I have to raise a little the CR of the enemyes... But I don't raise the CR/PEL of the Party... So yes... They get more PX)
In the same way I don't calculate how much good or bad are the spells of the spellcaster of the party, or how much big is the sword of the warrior.

--- Bye
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Clay_More said:
Hey Mr. Krust,

Hiya mate! :)

Clay_More said:
yours threads seem to have some Energizer Bunny over them ;)

I don't know how these threads get out of hand so quick, though I appreciate the interest of course. ;)

Clay_More said:
I read some of the discussion on the subject of adding low CR minions to a high CR encounter (with the example of Skeletons and a Paragon, Great, Wyrm, Fiendish Red Dragon or something). As I think I might have pointed out later on, any system can be broken if taken to the extreme (some systems more than others though. See Epic Spells in ELH for examples).

I am sure I will work something out over the weekend.

Clay_More said:
It wouldn't be bad at all seeing the system put into some form of electronic spreadsheet. If only I hadn't stopped doing Delphi, I could have volunteered, but the knowledge is extremely rusty these days, wouldn't do much good.

I don't know enough about such things myself so I can't really chastise you. :p

Clay_More said:
And on another note, took the liberty of making a referral or two to the thread, seems most people who post monsters in them D&D forums ask for advice on CR-evaluation.

I appreciate the love dude! :D

Clay_More said:
I gotten through the first three converted 3.5 monsters for Necromancers Legacy with the system, hasn't been any incidents yet (CR's ended up what I would expect from playtesting).

Good news! :)
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hello again mate! :)

xanatos said:
That table doesn't contain STR, DEX and CON! I'm sure... I have the book!

Use the MM table for ability scores and the MM2 table for everything else.

xanatos said:
Ok... But PC and NPC classes do get it, right?

Its already rated in their class levels. You don't have to add to CR because of Ability Score bonuses derived from Levels or Hit Dice.

xanatos said:
My point was that you wrote "Immune to For saves fullstop" (p. 8) and not "Immune to For saves BUT those that affects objects"

Space.

xanatos said:
72 and 64 where with the Elite Array.

with 72 point spread you can have 18, 18, 18, 6, 6, 6.

with 25 point buy you can't.

There is a difference.
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hiya Kerrick mate! :)

Kerrick said:
Ahh. Question: What do you with a spell system that goes above 9th-level spells (like, as someone mentioned, metamagic spells, or the level-based epic spell system our group uses)?

Not sure I understand the question mate? :confused:

Is this a question about the Immortals Handbook?

Kerrick said:
Yeah, they have 1/10, 1/8, 1/4, 1/3, and 1/2 - what about the odd ones?

Thats my fault, I made a mistake in writing out the Table.

It should be 2/3, 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, 1/6, 1/8, 1/12, 1/16.

Kerrick said:
Okay, got my notes now. I didn't miss much the first time, thankfully.

:)

Kerrick said:
The ability scores rated at 0 isn't totally accurate - it should be a -, since they're unratable.

Oh for goodness sake! :D

You can't please all the people all the time.

Kerrick said:
The layout is very nice, BTW - easy to read, and easy to find stuff, and I especially like how it follows the monster stablock - makes it a lot easier to go down and tally up the mods now.

Glad you like the improvements mate. :)
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
hiya mate! :)

Wulf Ratbane said:
Stop the press...

So are you saying that a creature with 4 HD has to pay an additional cost to raise one attribute by +1?

Or are you saying that cost is subsumed into the cost of his HD. So a creature with 4 HD gets +1 attribute for free, but then pays an additional cost for +2 and beyond? 8 HD would get +2 for free, but pay for +3 an above, etc.

The latter.

But I would generally ignore anything but ability score modifiers from specific sources.
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Sorcica said:
Hi Krust!

Hiya mate! :)

Sorcica said:
First of all I will start out with a correction :) You rate the Giant type as +0.2 CR because of Darkvision. Only thing is, that was in 3.0. In the MM 3.5 giant type creatures have low light vision and therefore only +0.1 CR ;)

Hope I haven't destroyed your day.

I'll try and live with the ignominy. :p

Sorcica said:
And now please help! Anyone! I have tried to calculate the CR of some creatures and no matter how I try I can't get the numbers UK get. So I must be doing something wrong, wrong, wrong and I don't know what it is....

:(

Sorcica said:
So if someone would please give me a hand here. Let's start with the Ogre, an old favorite of mine. Krust rate it at 5.225 CR. Here's what I get:

4 giant HD (0.55*4) = 2.2
Large size = 1.2
+5 natural armor = 0.5
Darkvision 0.2
Lowlight vision 0.1
Full Attack (2d8) = 0.9

This totals 5.1 CR. Where does the rest come from? What am I forgetting? And it gets worse when you take into consideration that the Ogre should have a -0.6 CR adjustment for its crappy ability scores, which ends up making the Ogre CR 4.5!
Help!

You forgot his Equipment.

Sorcica said:
Next the Doppelganger. Krust rate it at 4.43.

4 monstrous humanoid HD (0.6*4) = 2.4
+4 natural armor = 0.4
Darkvision = 0.2
Change Shape = 0.5
Detect Thoughts (18*2*0.005) = 0.18
Immune to sleep & charm = 0.2
Skill bonuses (+8) = 0.16

This gives 4.04 CR. Now add +1.4 CR for ability scores and you got a full CR more than Krusty's rating.
Help!

You forgot his Full Attack.

Sorcica said:
Last one, the elf warrior. UK got it at 1.285.

Elf traits = 0.36
Warrior lvl = 0.7
lvl of npc equipment = 0.125

Total = 1.185. Where does the last 0.1 come from?

So I'm confused and admitting it.

Anyone?

Elves have over 100gp worth of equipment. The equivalent of 2nd-level NPC wealth. +0.25
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
kreynolds said:

Hiya kreynolds mate! :)

kreynolds said:
Couple questions about templates. Let's say you have a template that changes your creature type to outsider and adds +4 to Strength. Your monster creation tips suggest allowing outsiders to use the elite array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8) as their base. However, humans use the standard array (13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8). Now, when you're calculating up the CR for the +4 to Strength, do you need to change the assumed array for the character from standard to elite now that they're an outsider? Or do you just ignore that and figure up the CR modifier for the +4 to Strength at +0.4 and call it a day?

Just figure up the CR modifier for the +4 to Strength at +0.4 and call it a day. :D

kreynolds said:
Also, since templates do not typically include hit die, how do the golden and silver rules apply to them? Can you only actually apply these rules to the CR of a template _after_ the template has been applied to a creature? It doesn't seem to me that you can apply either rules to the template until you have the base creature's CR to work with as well.

Every single CR factor is rated 15% higher than it should be. Thats why Class Levels are CR +1.1672 on average.

But we know that 1 Level = 1 CR. So therefore all the CR factors (except class levels which are modified already for simplicity) must be reduced 15%.

kreynolds said:
What do you think? Also, over on the Wizard's boards, these questions are also more or less stated here, in my post just above yours.

I'll go take a look.

Thanks for 'flying the flag' over there. :)
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hi xanatos mate! :)

xanatos said:
I consider Good Rolls to be Players Helper and, as such, I don't put them in the equation (unless they are TOO much good rolls... Then I know that I have to raise a little the CR of the enemyes... But I don't raise the CR/PEL of the Party... So yes... They get more PX)
In the same way I don't calculate how much good or bad are the spells of the spellcaster of the party, or how much big is the sword of the warrior.

Okay. Then how can you criticise me for not rating Ability Scores exactly when you yourself wouldn't rate them exactly anyway? :confused:
 

Matrix Sorcica

Adventurer
Upper_Krust said:
You forgot his Equipment.

Yes I did :eek:

But his lousy scores would put his CR way lower than your estimate anyways. I'm actually quite confused by your appliance (or lack of) of ability scores in CR calculation. See below, please

You forgot his Full Attack.

So I did. Which would bring the total to CR 4.39. Close to the 4.43 you get. But what about the dobbelgangers +14 to ability scores then?

I am under the impression, as I've stated earlier, that ability modifiers that are not part of Size affect CR on a +1/0.1 basis. If not, I'm lost.

Obiviously, the Ogre's rotten mental stats are not included in his CR and neither is the Doppelganger's superior stats.
In answering my questions on the trolls ECL, you implied that the Troll's CR didn't reflect its better than large size ability scores.

Now, I don't want to open the can of worms that the discussion of ability scores and CR is, because I agree that a player's high stat rolls shouldn't be included. However, I DO think that any other modifier should be included.

If the CR listings in v.4 do not include modiers from stats beyond size, two problems occur IMO:

1. Some monsters are underrated, some monsters overrated. The Troll is more dangerous than its listed CR (even enough to change the EL) and the Ogre is not as dangerous as listed (vulnerable to magic due to low wis, for example).

2. It is not possible to use the CR listings as ECL. One has to doublecheck to get the correct modifier from stats and size.

Comments?

Elves have over 100gp worth of equipment. The equivalent of 2nd-level NPC wealth. +0.25

Ah.. I was mislead by the elf warrior being first lvl.


Thanks for clearing all this up, Krust.

One last question: How do you rate SR that increases by lvl a la the Drow. I mean what's the ECL of a drow's SR?

Thanks.
 

xanatos

First Post
with 72 point spread you can have 18, 18, 18, 6, 6, 6.
with 25 point buy you can't.

Yes, a difference that your CR rules don't count... I know that a 18 and a 6 well placed are surely better than two 12. But still you can sell back attributes at 0.1 CR/point (p. 8, second column), so there isn't any difference! And then even the Attribute is important... It's quite clear that if we put the 18 in Intelligence and the 6 in STR we will make a very poor fighter!

(as a note, in the MM it's suggested that creatures should start with a base of 10 in each attr (or 11, but it doesn't change if we use only even modifiers, as suggested somewhere else)). I'm not sure how this will mix with your suggestion of using at least the "advanced" array of attributes... Perhaps you should simply have put three templates:

"base" attributes: 0 points
"advanced": 0.3 points
"elite" 1.2 points

In this way a person can simply make an elite creature using the "elite" template (yes, I do know... this means that normally "standard" monsters have a CR of 1.2 points lower than PC, because PC are built on at least the Elite array, monsters on the base array)

Okay. Then how can you criticise me for not rating Ability Scores exactly when you yourself wouldn't rate them exactly anyway?
????? We where speaking of including or not including attributes in Size. It's something totally different. I was pointing out that there isn't any single table with absolute numbers (and not relative, like the one of the MM) that contains every modifier for size. I even think that, if you wanted to give "standard" attributes based on size, you should have used the table of page 295 (MM3.5)(table 5-1) (the one that gives examples of attributes for various sizes) (the funny thing is that those numbers are a little different from the values you can obtain using the "relative" table.
Could you post your Size breakdown? (I'm building an Excel spreadsheet to calculate CR... It's quite beautiful)

--- Bye
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top