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

[Wulf Ratbane]

The only comfort I can take is that I'd like to think the few of you who tackled revising some CRs have a better appreciation for your Uncle Krusts abilities. Even though this latest revision is a mere trifle compared to determining the entirety of the CRs to begin with.

Aww, baby, don't be like that. I still love you.


Wulf

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey Wulf mate!

Hmmm... I suppose it is my "scientific method" getting the better of me.

I used scientific method wherever and whenever possible.

Ability scores correlate directly to CR. You should include them. They are applicable outside of the framework of character classes-- and the character classes is what the Silver Rule is attempting to compensate for.

I now agree Ability Scores should be included.

The "Silver Rule" is based on a lot of arbitrary calculations that for some reason didn't make it into the rest of the CR factors--

Again with the 'arbitrary'. Mate thats fightin' talk! You better get ready to throw down or retract that statement.

The basic building block of the CR system is that a single feat is worth +0.2 CR.

I then broke every factor down (scientifically) as to how it relates to feats then applied the results to the CR system. After I did this the system showed that the average character had a +16% advantage (Assuming 20th-level = CR 20).

This meant that a single feat was not worth +0.2, but instead it was worth +0.17 (85%).

However, if we change this precept then we have to change everything by the same degree!

Within the CR factors this makes for some ridiculous fractions, so I deemed it was easier to simply apply the Silver Rule at the end rather than take every factor and make it 85% of the current figure.

you can't go into the full list of CR factors and build a "cleric," for example; the only place where this information exists is in the Design Parameters section.

Yes, but the point is; the information is there to do so. I simply seperated it for convenience and simplicity.

I want to know where the figure "Hit Dice: d4 = CR +0.083" comes from. Accuracy down to the thousandth decimal point?

Well after intensive study it appeared that the Toughness feat should (on average over 20 levels) add +6 hit points per feat.

This meant that adding d4 (2.5) hit points per level was worth 41.6% of a typical feat.

So if a typical feat is worth CR +0.2, 41.6% of a feat is worth +0.083 (capped at 3 decimal places as with everything else).

And I hate that this section "averages" the cost of abilities across 20 character levels. You don't "average" the cost of a feat across the first 20 Hit Dice for creatures... And so on.

If you wanted to, you could happily work out the individual CRs for every class at every level.

I didn't think anyone would want to, hence my outlining of such things by averaging it over the 20 levels.

So basically, it seems you're piling assumptions on top of assumptions and then making a calculation afterwards to make all the data "fit." It just doesn't smell right and doesn't pass the scientific method.

Balderdash. Its as scientific an approach as is humanly possible.

If I have a party of all clerics, does that mean that I need to adjust the Silver Rule to determine this party's "true" EL? What if they are all rogues? The Silver Rule would make a given EL even harder on rogues.

Is that level of "accuracy" necessary?

No.

Wouldn't ignoring the facts be arbitrary though!?

We can get away with it of course, just as we can get away with omitting the racial modifiers but that doesn't mean they are not there.

The only character-class assumption that should be made is 1 Character Level = 1 CR. It is one of the founding "theses" of the entire system. Why you would make that assumption up front, then go on to completely disprove it doesn't make any sense.

I didn't disprove it. Clearly you don't understand the significance of the silver rule (see above).

Thats not to say I think the Silver rule could not be left out; clearly (as you have pointed out) its impact is minimal. Why do you think I introduced the Silver Rule as optional in the first place!

Anyhow, my opinion is that the system is stronger without it. UK knows I intend to use his EXCELLENT work (let's remind everyone that I LOVE it) in one of my own products, but the Silver Rule won't be making the cut. It pretends to present accuracy, but instead all it does is inject mathematical uncertainty and cut the legs out from under one of the starting premises.

Thats certainly your prerogative mate.

I would agree with you that the system works well enough without the Silver Rule.

Of course I leave it up to DMs to decide what level of accuracy they want.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey Wulf mate!

Aww, baby, don't be like that. I still love you.

Now you are just making me blush.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I'm following you UK. I'll rescind my "arbitrary" comment first and foremost before I go on. It's all arbitrary-- we'll move on the assumption that I trust your judgement in valuing any given factor.

But, there's so many uncertainties with the way that character classes were determined. Because you've factored in everything a class gains over 20 levels, it means you're going to be off the mark several times. A 1st level rogue shouldn't be paying for the abilities of a 20th level cleric-- but the Silver Rule does just that. It derives an average and then paints the entire spectrum of monster CRs with the same brush. Every monster gets the same discount.

Just, as an example, a rogue with evasion vs. improved evasion, or uncanny dodge vs. improved uncanny dodge; a barbarian with rage and barbarian with tireless rage.

The point of the CR/EL system is, essentially, to determine a "fair fight."

So take two combatants: A and B.

Let's assume both of these guys are CR4.

Let's also assume both of these guys have evasion.

The ability works equally, does the same exact thing, for both combatants. But, using the Silver Rule, combatant A paid 0.2 for this ability while combatant B only paid 0.17.

The point of the CR system should be that every ability is worth the same amount. (Hard numbers.)

And, technically speaking, that discount isn't even "accurate:" evasion isn't a class ability of the cleric, yet the cleric's total 131.96 is swinging the avg cost of evasion UP, even though the rogue only comes out to 109.41.

To say that, "on average" the spectrum of character classes has an advantage is akin to "averaging" the cost of Spell Resistance across all the monsters, even though some of them have it and some don't, and some of the combatants the monster faces has spells and some don't, etc.

What I really want is hard numbers (apples to apples) across the board. Abilty X invariably costs Y.

I understand that the Silver Rule is meant to "equalize" what PCs pay for each factor vs what monsters pay for the same factor.

I also understand that using the Silver Rule is infinitely easier that reworking all of the factors; as you correctly pointed out, the fact that the character classes DIDN'T "add up" correctly meant that you must have over-costed some things or under-costed others.

But the Silver Rule fix doesn't accurately do what you want it to do. It doesn't account for all of the classes that ever could be; it doesn't account for prestige classes or other sources of character class abilities; it doesn't and can't and shouldn't account for a whole lot of things that characters can do that monsters can't.

If you bring in a new core class, whose abilities add up to 1.25, the Silver Rule is suddenly broken. The average "character class edge" has changed.

Brief side track: Even applying CR to a character is iffy, because an ability that may be worth +0.2 to a monster (say, flight) is worth a whole lot more to a character...

Anyhow, my point is this: The Silver Rule really doesn't and can't do what it is that you are trying to make it do. It's a band-aid over the fact that the character classes didn't add up correctly. It's like, "Oops! Well, we can make the data fit if we just multiply everything by xxx..."

What I am saying is that you don't need it. Within the first few sentences, you enter into the entire system that you've constructed with the assumption that 1 Character Level = 1 CR.

That is a reasonable, workable assumption that the GM who uses your system can live with, and it will always be "true" and "accurate."

Going from that, to: 1 Character Level = 1.09 CR for rogues, and 1.32 CR for clerics, for an average of 1.16 for all character classes, even though a 1st level rogue has little resemblance to a 20th level cleric, etc...

Well, you're not really making the system more accurate. Why should an orc should get a Silver Rule CR discount, making it more difficult for the 1st level rogue, because the 20th level cleric comes out at 1.32 CR / Character level?

Do you really believe the Silver Rule makes ELs more "fair and accurate?"

Just seems like an awful lot of extra effort for very little (translated to my opinion: zero) gain.

And I still love you.

Wulf

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

Its pretty simple.

A single Level PC with the standard array of stats is approx. CR 2 (+1 for level, +1 for stats*).

*+0.9 actually but for the sake of brevity...

eg. 1st-level character
ECL 1
CR 2 (That includes typical racial mods as well)

Therefore a monster (whose stats are based on a 10.5 average) will always be -1 ECL less than its CR.

eg. Orc with Elite stats (standard array)
CR 2
ECL 1

Ahaaa....

Thanks mate. I appreciate the people who helped with about fifty (of which only about half were incorrect*) of the revised CRs leaving me only a measly 600 or so to do myself.

*

Even though I swore I would never touch them again there only ever was going to be one person capable of handling such a deadly mission...unfortunately.

The only comfort I can take is that I'd like to think the few of you who tackled revising some CRs have a better appreciation for your Uncle Krusts abilities. Even though this latest revision is a mere trifle compared to determining the entirety of the CRs to begin with.

Oh yes, I have the deepest respect for the Grand Old Man of CRs.

But could you please tell me if my submissions (letter A) were done correctly? Otherwise it'll be a waste to do L-O this weekend.

BTW I think Wulf has some good points. But I'm afraid that the solution should remain the silver rule, unless Wulf wants to do all the classes lvl by lvl.

Cheers

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

Hi Krust!

I have a minor gripe. It should come as no surprise to you that it concerns ECL

In your system, a monster's full attack damage potential affects CR. I can live with that, even the problems it causes when the Marilith chooses to use daggers instead of greatswords. But I find it problematic when using that same CR to determine ECL.

An example: The minotaur's revised CR is 8.69 before the golden rule. (Old CR 8.89 - 1.2 [old size] + 0.4 [new size] + 0.6 [ability scores]. Add 10 lvls of wealth and you get CR 10.69. Apply the silver rule to this and you get 9.087 = ECL 9.
But if this minotaur wants to use a greatsword (large longsword) instead, CR before the golden rule becomes 8.14. Add 9 lvls of wealth and you get CR 9.94. Silver rule makes that CR 8.449 = ECL 8.
One level difference.

I haven't accounted for the very minor details of the cost of a greataxe vs. a large longsword etc. because the minotaur gets PC equipment anyway, this is more to illustrate a point.

Can you see the problem? The minotaur with shield and a better armor class is lvl 8 whereas the minotaur with greataxe and better damage is lvl 9.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey Wulf matey!

...I tried posting this last night but it wouldn't let me.

I'm following you UK. I'll rescind my "arbitrary" comment first and foremost before I go on.

I think its only fair. I agree with most of your points regarding the Silver Rule but I don't agree that the system is inherantly arbitrary.

It's all arbitrary-- we'll move on the assumption that I trust your judgement in valuing any given factor.

You can't even say that my initial equation* was arbitrary, simply because there was no initial correlation and you need a base unit as a starting point.

*1 feat = +0.2 CR

Once I determined that basic building block everything else was determined as scientifically as possible.

But, there's so many uncertainties with the way that character classes were determined. Because you've factored in everything a class gains over 20 levels, it means you're going to be off the mark several times.

I could be off in terms of dividing each class level CR equally; but I am not off in terms of my own system - everything is rated the same way; under the same auspices.

A 1st level rogue shouldn't be paying for the abilities of a 20th level cleric-- but the Silver Rule does just that. It derives an average and then paints the entire spectrum of monster CRs with the same brush. Every monster gets the same discount.

As long as people realise that there is a difference between the Cleric and the Rogue I don't care whether they use the Silver Rule or not. The Core Classes are not equal; thats what I wanted to point out.

I certainly see the Silver Rule as more of an ECL/character creation tool than something that needs to be religiously adhered to with regards CR.

Just, as an example, a rogue with evasion vs. improved evasion, or uncanny dodge vs. improved uncanny dodge; a barbarian with rage and barbarian with tireless rage.

The point of the CR/EL system is, essentially, to determine a "fair fight."

Yes. Except when its to determine ECL, whereupon its to determine equal class level.

So take two combatants: A and B.

Let's assume both of these guys are CR4.

Let's also assume both of these guys have evasion.

The ability works equally, does the same exact thing, for both combatants. But, using the Silver Rule, combatant A paid 0.2 for this ability while combatant B only paid 0.17.

The point of the CR system should be that every ability is worth the same amount. (Hard numbers.)

And, technically speaking, that discount isn't even "accurate:" evasion isn't a class ability of the cleric, yet the cleric's total 131.96 is swinging the avg cost of evasion UP, even though the rogue only comes out to 109.41.

To say that, "on average" the spectrum of character classes has an advantage is akin to "averaging" the cost of Spell Resistance across all the monsters, even though some of them have it and some don't, and some of the combatants the monster faces has spells and some don't, etc.

What I really want is hard numbers (apples to apples) across the board. Abilty X invariably costs Y.

I understand that the Silver Rule is meant to "equalize" what PCs pay for each factor vs what monsters pay for the same factor.

I also understand that using the Silver Rule is infinitely easier that reworking all of the factors; as you correctly pointed out, the fact that the character classes DIDN'T "add up" correctly meant that you must have over-costed some things or under-costed others.

I would assume the initial building block of 1 feat = +0.2 CR should actually have been +0.17.

But the Silver Rule fix doesn't accurately do what you want it to do. It doesn't account for all of the classes that ever could be; it doesn't account for prestige classes or other sources of character class abilities; it doesn't and can't and shouldn't account for a whole lot of things that characters can do that monsters can't.

Thats certainly an interesting and valid point.

If you bring in a new core class, whose abilities add up to 1.25, the Silver Rule is suddenly broken. The average "character class edge" has changed.

Well it would actually still be 116% under that example but I take your point.

Brief side track: Even applying CR to a character is iffy, because an ability that may be worth +0.2 to a monster (say, flight) is worth a whole lot more to a character...

I'm not sure I agree with that (admittedly popular) misconception. Certainly a power in the hands of a PC will see more 'game time' but I don't see it as being more 'useful' per se.

Anyhow, my point is this: The Silver Rule really doesn't and can't do what it is that you are trying to make it do. It's a band-aid over the fact that the character classes didn't add up correctly. It's like, "Oops! Well, we can make the data fit if we just multiply everything by xxx..."

I agree with that.

What I am saying is that you don't need it. Within the first few sentences, you enter into the entire system that you've constructed with the assumption that 1 Character Level = 1 CR.

That is a reasonable, workable assumption that the GM who uses your system can live with, and it will always be "true" and "accurate."

Going from that, to: 1 Character Level = 1.09 CR for rogues, and 1.32 CR for clerics, for an average of 1.16 for all character classes, even though a 1st level rogue has little resemblance to a 20th level cleric, etc...

Well, you're not really making the system more accurate. Why should an orc should get a Silver Rule CR discount, making it more difficult for the 1st level rogue, because the 20th level cleric comes out at 1.32 CR / Character level?

Do you really believe the Silver Rule makes ELs more "fair and accurate?"

Just seems like an awful lot of extra effort for very little (translated to my opinion: zero) gain.

You are definately starting to convince me with regards the Silver Rule.

And I still love you.

...well you're only human.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Sorcica mate!

Ahaaa....

Simple when you know how.

Oh yes, I have the deepest respect for the Grand Old Man of CRs.

But could you please tell me if my submissions (letter A) were done correctly?

I think they were about 80%+ right.

Otherwise it'll be a waste to do L-O this weekend.

Don't bother with those, I'll have them all finished before the weekend.

BTW I think Wulf has some good points. But I'm afraid that the solution should remain the silver rule, unless Wulf wants to do all the classes lvl by lvl.

I may keep the Silver Rule as an option but remove the figure from the Revised CR list. That way it won't confuse people.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Krust!

Hiya mate!

I have a minor gripe. It should come as no surprise to you that it concerns ECL

In your system, a monster's full attack damage potential affects CR. I can live with that, even the problems it causes when the Marilith chooses to use daggers instead of greatswords. But I find it problematic when using that same CR to determine ECL.

An example: The minotaur's revised CR is 8.69 before the golden rule. (Old CR 8.89 - 1.2 [old size] + 0.4 [new size] + 0.6 [ability scores]. Add 10 lvls of wealth and you get CR 10.69. Apply the silver rule to this and you get 9.087 = ECL 9.
But if this minotaur wants to use a greatsword (large longsword) instead, CR before the golden rule becomes 8.14. Add 9 lvls of wealth and you get CR 9.94. Silver rule makes that CR 8.449 = ECL 8.
One level difference.

I haven't accounted for the very minor details of the cost of a greataxe vs. a large longsword etc. because the minotaur gets PC equipment anyway, this is more to illustrate a point.

Can you see the problem? The minotaur with shield and a better armor class is lvl 8 whereas the minotaur with greataxe and better damage is lvl 9.

Perhaps there should be a generic modifier for damage with regards size. Same as the Damage Table in the Design Parameters.

Although this would then give you the problem of incorrect CRs.

So seemingly there is no way to please all of the people all of the time here.

Personally I would just use whats there. The CR rating is for the stereotypical creature and I wouldn't get too hung up on such minor points.

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

So seemingly there is no way to please all of the people all of the time here.

Ain't that the truth

Personally I would just use whats there. The CR rating is for the stereotypical creature and I wouldn't get too hung up on such minor points.

Minor points? I don't know about your players, but mine sure wouldn't call 1 lvl for minor, especially when we're not talking epic play.

Oh well, as long as one is just aware that such minor points do exist, one can always adjust accordingly.

Thanks for answering. So you won't need any CR revised?