• NOW LIVE! -- One-Page Adventures for D&D 5th Edition on Kickstarter! A booklet of colourful one-page adventures for D&D 5th Edition ranging from levels 1-9 and designed for a single session of play.
log in or register to remove this ad

 

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

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hi CRGreathouse mate! :)

CRGreathouse said:
It's only a small part of the lich, but I'd say that skill bonuses are overvalued -- they're probably only worth .01 instead of .02.

You know there are people who would say I am undervaluing the skill bonuses (if you contrasted it with the skill focus feats)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hi Anabstercorian mate! :)

Anabstercorian said:
Conceivably, a better solution would be to grant virtual spellcasting levels, a la a prestige class, to the Lich template. They're valued low enough that you might be able to add them in without boosting the CR too much.

Interesting idea, but that in itself would affect the CR/ECL of course. ;)
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hey seasong mate! :)

seasong said:
Honestly, I think the factors are fine, but that the lich template is designed with an end ECL of +4 in mind. Bump turn resistance to +7, maybe give some DC boosts to the special abilities, and it starts to look all right again.

Well you would think that a Lich would maybe have some item that gave it a bonus to Turn Resistance (or even a spell in effect)?
 


seasong

First Post
Upper_Krust said:
Well you would think that a Lich would maybe have some item that gave it a bonus to Turn Resistance (or even a spell in effect)
I would think that that would help the lich keep pace with a Cleric who has the same things in reverse.

Like I said, I think the factors are individually correct, but that when WotC built the lich, they were assuming it would be only 4 HD under.

And really, having had some time with it, I think I'm okay with it - I would just give the lich certain boosts for its new ECL, so its HD doesn't become a sizable disadvantage.
 


Kerrick

First Post
CR 3 = EL 7 (as per Table 2-1)
20 creatures = EL +8 (as per Table 2-3)
Final EL 15

EL 15 is a moderate encounter for a 12th-level party (PEL 15) or a 50/50 encounter for a 6th-level party (PEL 11).

Ohhh! *smites forehead mightily* I must have mis-read Wulf's way of doing the EL - I thought it was tally all the CRs up, then tack on the adder. This makes a LOT more sense! Thanks! :D

BTW - something else I caught - The nonintelligent construct CR modifier should be 1.4, not 2.4.
 

Matrix Sorcica

Adventurer
Upper_Krust said:
Hi Sorcica mate! :)



I just don't think the majority of people will want that level of detail its not very intuitive.

If you rate them for monsters you have to rate them for PCs too. Thats the trade off you have to make.

Krust.
I absolutely do not understand what you mean. :eek:
I really want to.
In my world every stat modifier that is not accounted for due to size (or magic) should be rated. It is of course important when regaring PCs, but as my example of the succubus illustrates, so is it for monsters.

I want it to be: all modifiers for size are included in size CR. All modifiers beyond that is rated individually.
I really think the other approach is wrong. I don't care about rolls of 18's or 6'6 or whatever. I care about what those stats would be with or without modifier. Nothing more.

Help me out. Your system is for me the ultimate building block to the perfect universal rpg. Give me the final tidbits to complete it.
 

Wulf Ratbane

Adventurer
Sorcica said:
Krust.
I absolutely do not understand what you mean. :eek:
I really want to.
In my world every stat modifier that is not accounted for due to size (or magic) should be rated. It is of course important when regaring PCs, but as my example of the succubus illustrates, so is it for monsters.

This is like deja vu all over again.

I've been saying exactly the same thing for exactly the same reasons.

I don't know why anyone would go through the process of using UK's system with modifiers for everything down to the last detail, and then for a minute pretend that ability scores don't matter. That is a design consideration made for a crowd of folks who aren't going to care for this level of exacting detail in the first place.

If you are going to be precise, BE PRECISE.

Wulf
 

Wulf Ratbane

Adventurer
Kerrick said:
Okay, I may just be dense or something, but I'm still having problems with the EL system. Example: I tallied up an encounter with 5 average salamanders (CR 6). Total CR: 30 (EL 20), with an adjustment of +4 (5 creatures), for a total of EL 24?? That doesn't sound right.. the DMG says it's EL 11, which sounds closer to the mark.

As I said before, stop thinking and caring about what the DMG says. The DMG EL does not have a correlation to UKs EL.

5 Salamanders, CR6. Total CR = 30, EL = 20. 5 Creatures = +4 adjustment; subtract from the EL: 20 - 4 = EL16.

The difference between my EL 16 and UK's EL 15 is that UK converts from CR to EL before adding; mine adds all CRs and then converts to EL; the difference is in multiple "rounding downs" of the CR to EL table that will happen when you convert each creature before adding them together.

Another example: 20 wights (CR 3): total CR 60 (EL 20), adjustment +8. EL 28? A mid-level cleric could blast them all before they did any real damage, as could a mid-levle mage with a couple fireballs.

20 Wights, CR 3. Total CR = 60. CR 60 = EL 24. 20 Creatures = +8 adjustment. EL 24 - 8 = EL 16.

The advantage to "Wulf's Method" is with mixed groups:

20 Wights +5 Salamanders. (20x3) + (5x6) = CR 90. CR 90 = EL 26. 25 Creatures total = +8 adjustment. EL 26 - 8 = EL 18.

I couldn't even begin to do that same calculation using UK's "Determining Encounter Level For Multiple Opponents (Mixed EL)."
 

CRGreathouse

Community Supporter
Wulf Ratbane said:
I don't know why anyone would go through the process of using UK's system with modifiers for everything down to the last detail, and then for a minute pretend that ability scores don't matter. That is a design consideration made for a crowd of folks who aren't going to care for this level of exacting detail in the first place.

If you are going to be precise, BE PRECISE.

I think I understand UK -- and if I do, I should be able to translate. I'll try to keep my own viewpoint out of this (at least for now).

Monsters have high ability modifiers (outside of size modifiers), but those modifiers just put them on par with unmodified (or barely modified) PC stats, since PC stats are much higher (elite array, 4d6 drop lowest, etc.). The only time that scores really matter is when they're combined with the elite array (or other method of making the stats higher).

Thus, the troll with Str 23 has typical strength (after taking its size into account) for a PC fighter. If a PC fighter was a troll, though, they would have their Str score, in addition to the troll's +12, so it needs to be included.

Is that fair, UK? Is that what you're saying? If not, would you explain -- because at least 3 of us would be confused if it was.
 

Dark Wolf 97

First Post
Hey U_K and everybody!
Originally posted by Seasong
Honestly, I think the factors are fine, but that the lich template is designed with an end ECL of +4 in mind. Bump turn resistance to +7, maybe give some DC boosts to the special abilities, and it starts to look all right again.

I agree that the lich should only be ECL +4, perhaps the higher HD a creature has, the less special abilities should count for. Of course, if he did the lich, he'd have to do them all, so.... :)

Just a thought :rolleyes:
 


Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hi seasong mate! :)

seasong said:
I would think that that would help the lich keep pace with a Cleric who has the same things in reverse.

Like I said, I think the factors are individually correct, but that when WotC built the lich, they were assuming it would be only 4 HD under.

And really, having had some time with it, I think I'm okay with it - I would just give the lich certain boosts for its new ECL, so its HD doesn't become a sizable disadvantage.

Mmmm, I wonder is even the Demilich going to be in trouble in this regard. :rolleyes:
 


Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hi Kerrick matey! :)

Kerrick said:
Ohhh! *smites forehead mightily* I must have mis-read Wulf's way of doing the EL - I thought it was tally all the CRs up, then tack on the adder. This makes a LOT more sense! Thanks! :D

My pleasure mate.

Kerrick said:
BTW - something else I caught - The nonintelligent construct CR modifier should be 1.4, not 2.4.

It loses the inability to heal itself when it becomes sentient.
 

xanatos

First Post
Upper_Krust said:
Hi xanatos mate! :)
The can't run of zombies and golems.
Then you shouldn't put it in the middle of the various movement mode... It's a movement modifier... It should be in the CR +0.2/CR -0.2 section.

--- Bye
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hi Sorcica mate! :)

Sorcica said:
Krust.
I absolutely do not understand what you mean. :eek:
I really want to.
In my world every stat modifier that is not accounted for due to size (or magic) should be rated. It is of course important when regaring PCs, but as my example of the succubus illustrates, so is it for monsters.

I want it to be: all modifiers for size are included in size CR. All modifiers beyond that is rated individually.
I really think the other approach is wrong. I don't care about rolls of 18's or 6'6 or whatever. I care about what those stats would be with or without modifier. Nothing more.

Help me out. Your system is for me the ultimate building block to the perfect universal rpg. Give me the final tidbits to complete it.

The tidbits are already there. I have explained how ability scores affect CR. If you want to add them you are free to do so.

My position is that if you add every single ability score for monsters you have to do the same for PCs and I think that factoring 'chance dice roll' ability scores to PCs infringes too much on the +1 Level = +1 CR dynamic.

Wulf has an idea to pretend not to factor PC ability scores; but instead subtract them from monster CR. However, I am not yet convinced that is intuitive enough.
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hey Wulf mate! :)

Wulf Ratbane said:
This is like deja vu all over again.

I've been saying exactly the same thing for exactly the same reasons.

I don't know why anyone would go through the process of using UK's system with modifiers for everything down to the last detail, and then for a minute pretend that ability scores don't matter. That is a design consideration made for a crowd of folks who aren't going to care for this level of exacting detail in the first place.

If you are going to be precise, BE PRECISE.

I just think it complicates the matter unnecessarily.

Its like, why don't we add racial modifiers less than +0.51.

Its like, why don't we add the exact rating for individual class levels.

I don't mind revising the system for people who want to rate ability scores exactly (maybe that could be the fundamental difference between v4 and any v4.1); but if you want to see another 600+ revised CRs along with it don't be expecting to see it before next year, because I don't plan on busting my hump on those again.

If xanatos (or someone) comes up with a spreadsheet (or similar) then all well and good.
 

Upper_Krust

Adventurer
Hi CRGreathouse mate! :)

CRGreathouse said:
I think I understand UK -- and if I do, I should be able to translate. I'll try to keep my own viewpoint out of this (at least for now).

Monsters have high ability modifiers (outside of size modifiers), but those modifiers just put them on par with unmodified (or barely modified) PC stats, since PC stats are much higher (elite array, 4d6 drop lowest, etc.). The only time that scores really matter is when they're combined with the elite array (or other method of making the stats higher).

Thus, the troll with Str 23 has typical strength (after taking its size into account) for a PC fighter. If a PC fighter was a troll, though, they would have their Str score, in addition to the troll's +12, so it needs to be included.

Is that fair, UK? Is that what you're saying? If not, would you explain -- because at least 3 of us would be confused if it was.

Thats more or less it.

The difference between Monster stats and the same monster determined using my CR system is (approximately) the same as the difference between PC stats and the the same PC deteremined using my CR system.

Its just a question of how detailed you want to get. All the rules for incorporating ability scores exactly are in v4 anyway; its not like I am hiding anything.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top