Whats the CR/ECL of 400 Kobolds?

[LokiDR]

Re: Kobolds as weather

At what point of high numbers / low stats does something stop being a monster, and become part of the environment?

That's really what we're talking about here. If there are an effectively infinite number of kobolds, or if it's just impossible to exterminate them in the short term, they're really not an "encounter" anymore. They're an environmental effect, like cold weather or extreme heat.
. . . .
That's my take on it, anyhow. YMMV.

That might be easier, but it doesn't answer the question: Can a large number of weak creatures be a challange to a party of high level adventurers?

 

[AuraSeer]

Re: Re: Kobolds as weather

That might be easier, but it doesn't answer the question: Can a large number of weak creatures be a challange to a party of high level adventurers?

Sorry, I meant to say something about that. I seem to have lost a couple of paragraphs in editing.

IMO, no, a mob of weak creatures by themselves cannot present a reasonable challenge to powerful PCs. Mostly they're useful if you want to increase the danger of other encounters closer to the party level. That includes traps. If a certain magic trap is EL 8 by itself, it might be EL 9 or 10 if manned by a pack of sneaky kobolds who know how to trigger it.

A side note on traps: some posters seem to be forgetting that it takes time and money to build the really dangerous ones. (You can of course improvise traps with available material-- bent branches and broken glass, for instance-- but they will be neither powerful nor precise.) If you give the kobolds the materials to freely build CR 5 traps, that's equivalent to handing them a squad of CR 5 troll bodyguards; in either case, the kobolds are no longer the major threat.

Weak beasties are also good for plot setup, because even if they can't actually kill the heroes, they can restrict their choices. The "protect the commoners" situation above is a perfect example. Those kobolds are no real danger to the party, but their existence forces the PCs to sit in the fortress and keep the civilians alive, rather than going out guerilla-style to harrass the real enemy. This would be true even if they never attacked, just scurried around in the walls and waited for the easy targets to be left alone.

 

[Numion]

and of course, YOUR cleric is so much more superior, HE'D never miss a Reflex save DC 20...

Roll your eyes till they fall out, but my cleric never makes ref save vs. pits. He Walks On Air

 

[Darklone]

Expanded Deathwatch in an item is something my players want since level 3

Too bad, till now it's only used by the assassins.

As for clerics walking on air and all that stuff... Check out that old thread, there were a lot of obvious trap suggestions that still didn't allow you to walk through easily.

And flying as well as airwalk does not help against cave ins

Another thing: The kobolds here are defending their lair. They have been here for quite some time, probably already surviving some attacks by other adventurers, demihumans, monsters or animals. Many rooms in the maze will be a defense by themselves, you don't need very expensive traps there.

 

[Numion]

And flying as well as airwalk does not help against cave ins

Right you are, but MY CLERIC .. ah, just kidding I'm not saying that highlevel PCs would be immune to all traps, but there's an area between 0% and 20% of resources. And mind you, those would still be the traps doing the work. The cavern could as well be empty, and the effects would be the same. So kobolds have about zero effect on the CR.

Another thing: The kobolds here are defending their lair. They have been here for quite some time, probably already surviving some attacks by other adventurers, demihumans, monsters or animals. Many rooms in the maze will be a defense by themselves, you don't need very expensive traps there.

Strange that the set-up keeps changing all the time. First its the commoners, then it's VC tunnels built around the PCs (which would take time, BTW) and now its their home cavern.

The rooms will be a defense? How excactly are they a defense if there's no Kobolds, traps or Pet Red Dragons to defend them?

 

[Numion]

But sure, I'd grant a chance to spot a kobold that wasn't quite low enough in his hole (ears poking up over the edge), but not all of them... So I could roll 30 times for those kobolds, or just work off averages... 1 Kobold gets 20, then assume that because of the low profile (ears) that these creatures are only revealing part of themselves, and thus gain a bonus to their hide, so changing from +4 (small bonus to Hide skill) to +12 (Diminuative) grants +16 to Hide (original +8 plus 8 for only ears showing) and all of a sudden, you are more on par with the rogues Spot (he'll still notice 80% or more of them, but can he point out the 24 holes he sees occupied in six seconds?

And that assumes that they all sit with their ears visible.

Um, I thought that hiding already assumed you're behind something? Or do you think that people can hide without being behind something? Thats another skill entirely (hide in plain sight).

 

[green slime]

Um, I thought that hiding already assumed you're behind something? Or do you think that people can hide without being behind something? Thats another skill entirely (hide in plain sight).

So if I (fat, sloth-like, middleaged, with NO hide skill), hide behind a barn, what are your chances to spot me from the otherside of the barn?

At some stage, it becomes rediculous, and has to be a DM call.

IF a kobold (size (small) is hiding/cowering behind a Redwood tree (10ft. in diameter), you have no chance of seeing it. As you move around/past the Redwood tree, you gain a chance to see it, your Spot check. But if you stand off some 300 ft. distant and gaze over at the tree, no, you don't spot the kobold. Of course, maybe, maybe, you see a strange shadow on the ground (depending on the sun), or tail flick, if you roll VERY well.

This is why "hiding" and Spot (the ability to see enemies at a distance) has been left rather open. Size affects the ability to hide. SO too should cover / concealment. Hide ability sort of assumes that there is always some place to hide.

 

[Numion]

So if I (fat, sloth-like, middleaged, with NO hide skill), hide behind a barn, what are your chances to spot me from the otherside of the barn?

Zero. Just like I can't see who's in the next room at my office. The difference being that people in the offices around me aren't trying to ambush, which the kobolds were trying. So if they wanted to ambush the PCs, I sure as hell would require them to be in a position that allows attacking actually. How would you have them do that with just their ears showing?

I'd say that the hide skill is intended just for situations like that, without modifiers. Maybe +2 circumstance (why not use that instead of the more complicated reasoning about the sizes?) bonus if you're prepared the position.

 

[green slime]

postulated by Bauglir

That just lets them know there's a party in the area, not find their location or see what they're doing, or launch any effective attack..

It does... You can detect the direction and approxiamate distance to an enemy. It lets you know that you can throw rocks / grenade-like missiles at the enemy. Sure you have to guess which square they are in and still suffer 50% miss chance, and the amount of damage done will be pathetic, but it is all about harrassing the PCs so they leave.

But it does allow them to gain surprise and do what they will with that, surprise which was going to be impossible for the kobolds to acheive, according to certain voices.

Another thought, Why are the Kobolds not allowed the traps and mundane equipment / allies they are listed with in their description? Nobody complains that the 13th level Blackguard encounter was wearing magical armour and wielding a magical great sword and had a fiendish companion... Items/Allies which boost the encounter beyond the capabilities of the NPC himself.

I haven't espoused using high CR traps, only up to CR3, and only what could be reasonably manufactured by the kobolds themselves, with basically limitless time and manpower. Spiked pits, simple snares, using items found in the terrain. And clever use of Decoys!

The effect wouldn't be the same (traps with kobolds, vs traps without kobolds), because as you are extracting yourself from the traps, the kobolds take advantage of your weakened position (or try to). Someone who falls into a pit trap will likely be pelted by stones, or spears, or have a net thrown over them. Dropping an item on the battlefield is likely to have a Kobold ATTEMPT to sneak up and grab it (dropping a bow to tumble in and Cleave, or some such)

I actually like a lot of AuraSeer's ideas on using kobolds when they are not such a main element in the story.

 

[Numion]

The pro-argument emphasizes tactics and using a monster's resources to its fullest, using creatures that know their only advantages lie in skills and sheer numbers.

But there aren't any significant skills.

The con-argument emphasizes that sheer brute force is enough to eliminate any threat that may be posed by the pathetic, puny creatures.

Except the multiple suggestions I made about using charms, disguises, intimidation, negotiations and scry-teleport tactics. Actually using brute force would be the last thing to do.

Hey, both are valid styles. Neither one is strictly correct. However, I have a serious issue with the statement that Kobolds cannot be *fun* to face at high levels, though.

I agree 100%. It's fun once in a while to encounter lower CR creatures.