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

[Upper_Krust]

Hey Zoatebix mate!

I was close, but I don't think I would have figured that out without your help - definately a bit more complicated than Rogue ("Okay, we've got 18% left, and 18 class features on the table - yay!"). Thank you so much!

Now I can get back to playing around with supernatural martial arts classes! Time to start breaking down Monte's Oathsworn...
-G

Glad I could help. Its nice to see people getting use out of the stuff I posted.

 

[kreynolds]

Hey UK (long time no chat),

I've been trying to rate the integrated spell levels of certain prestige classes, such as the blackguard, as well as some custom classes, and I'm having some trouble. I'm wondering if the math behind the formula works as simple as I think. If you take the bard spellcasting table and slow it down by half, are the integrated spell levels now worth .075? Or does it not work that way?

Is there some kind of formula behind how to figure up the rating of integrated spell levels? I'd love to find some middle ground between the paladin/ranger integrated spell levels and the bard integrated spell levels, but I'm not exactly sure how to go about that. Do you rate it level by level, or as a whole and then divide by 20? It seems like the latter is what you had to do for the paladin/ranger. Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks!

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey UK (long time no chat),

Hi kreynolds mate!

I trust you have been keeping well?

I've been trying to rate the integrated spell levels of certain prestige classes, such as the blackguard, as well as some custom classes, and I'm having some trouble. I'm wondering if the math behind the formula works as simple as I think. If you take the bard spellcasting table and slow it down by half, are the integrated spell levels now worth .075? Or does it not work that way?

It would work like that (as far as I can remember).

For the life of me I can never remember (or find the page where I wrote down) the exact formula I used to determine the integrated spell casting.

Is there some kind of formula behind how to figure up the rating of integrated spell levels?

Yes (honest).

Its something like:

0.0001 x Max Spell Level x Number of Spell Levels Day x Number of Available Spells

Then divide by 20.

I'm not totally sure though. I mean you all know the end results, so it should be easy to see if thats right.

I'd love to find some middle ground between the paladin/ranger integrated spell levels and the bard integrated spell levels, but I'm not exactly sure how to go about that. Do you rate it level by level, or as a whole and then divide by 20? It seems like the latter is what you had to do for the paladin/ranger. Any help would be appreciated.

Yes. I rated it as a whole and then divided it by 20, otherwise it was just far too complicated.

Thanks!

Sorry I couldn't be more help.

 

[kreynolds]

I trust you have been keeping well?

Definately.

Number of Spell Levels Day

Should I included 0-level spells in this?

EDIT: It also looks like you rate 0-level spells as half a single spell level. Is that correct?

Number of Available Spells

Is this "spells known", such as in the case of the sorcerer? Or is this the number of spells on the class spell list?

Yes. I rated it as a whole and then divided it by 20, otherwise it was just far too complicated.

Understandably.

Sorry I couldn't be more help.

No problem. Definately helpful.

EDIT: Okay, looks like that formula is definately the ticket. Very helpful indeed! Thanks!

EDIT II: But, in the case of spellcasters that don't have a limited list of spells known, such as the wizard or assassin, how do you take that into account when you rate them? It seems as though in the case of the wizard, since you rate it the same as a sorcerer, that you assume 4 spells of each spell level as the maximum. Is that correct?

I ask because the ranger/paladin comes out to 0.0096 (or 0.01), but v5 of your doc rates it at 0.02. Has the rating been changed? Does the formula not work with the ranger/paladin? Did I apply it wrong?

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hiya mate!

Definately.

Glad to hear it!

Should I included 0-level spells in this?

Treat as 1/2 Level

EDIT: It also looks like you rate 0-level spells as half a single spell level. Is that correct?

Yes.

Is this "spells known", such as in the case of the sorcerer? Or is this the number of spells on the class spell list?

Both.

Take spell levels at 20th, take number of total spells available in the PHB.

In fact I may have taken the total number of spells known as a percentage of all the spells in the book or something.

Understandably.

Indeed.

No problem. Definately helpful.

EDIT: Okay, looks like that formula is definately the ticket. Very helpful indeed! Thanks!

Really! Thats a bit of luck.

EDIT II: But, in the case of spellcasters that don't have a limited list of spells known, such as the wizard or assassin, how do you take that into account when you rate them? It seems as though in the case of the wizard, since you rate it the same as a sorcerer, that you assume 4 spells of each spell level as the maximum. Is that correct?

I think I worked out the Wizard and then went under the general assumption the difference was negligable given that it varies depending on the actual level you are at.

I ask because the ranger/paladin comes out to 0.0096 (or 0.01), but v5 of your doc rates it at 0.02. Has the rating been changed? Does the formula not work with the ranger/paladin? Did I apply it wrong?

Does the formula work for all the other classes, just not the Ranger/Paladin? Thats strange.

 

[kreynolds]

Does the formula work for all the other classes, just not the Ranger/Paladin? Thats strange.

Yup. But, the numbers I came up with don't use any numbers relevant to spells on the class spell list. In the case of the wizard, where I substituded "4 spells in spellbook per level" for "number of available spells", the formula worked out great. For the ranger, it didn't. Perhaps in the case of the ranger, the number of spells on the class list in the PH do indeed need to be used, rather than the assumed "4 per level".

The strange part is that I can't imagine the formula working for the wizard if you use the number of spells in the PH on the wizard's list. Perhaps you did indeed use a percentage. Would be interesting to know.

But still, thanks a bunch!

 

[kreynolds]

UK,

I checked your formula against the ranger. From what I can tell, there are 64 ranger spells in the PH. So, the formula for the ranger looks like this...

0.0001 x 4 x 30 x 64 / 20 = 0.0384

...which is pretty close to 0.04.

 

[Upper_Krust]

UK,

Hiya mate!

I checked your formula against the ranger. From what I can tell, there are 64 ranger spells in the PH. So, the formula for the ranger looks like this...

0.0001 x 4 x 30 x 64 / 20 = 0.0384

...which is pretty close to 0.04.

Well if that works for the other classes then thats probably it. Though I still can't remember.

What happens if you start the base at 0.001 but treat the number of possible spells as a percentage of the total spells?

 

[kreynolds]

Well if that works for the other classes then thats probably it.

It doesn't though. There are (I think) 376 wizard spells in the PH, which means it rates at 4.5684/level.

What happens if you start the base at 0.001 but treat the number of possible spells as a percentage of the total spells?

I'm not sure how many total spells there are in the PH, so I can't say. I'll look into it.

But, just to be sure, say a classes spell list represented 10% of the possible spells...how would you work that into the formula exactly?

 

[kreynolds]

Wizard spells represent roughly 62% of the spells in the PH. Applying the formula like this...

0.001 x 9 x 270 x 62% / 20 = 0.07533

...so something still isn't right.