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

[Upper_Krust]

Hi CRGreathouse mate!

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)

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Anabstercorian mate!

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]

Hey seasong mate!

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)?

 

[xanatos]

Is the Speed-Can't Run (-0,2) the Can't Run of Zombies (that can't Run) or is it a "can't walk, can only fly/swim/???"?

Bye
Max

 

[seasong]

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.

 

[Leopold]

so is 4.1 coming up soon?

 

[Kerrick]

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!

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

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

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.
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]

Krust.
I absolutely do not understand what you mean.
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]

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)."