Comparing the SAME test, vs published adventures

Stories about games that you run and/or have played in.

Moderator: Moderators

ubernoob
Duke
Posts: 2444
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 12:30 am

Post by ubernoob »

Judging__Eagle wrote:
ubernoob wrote:JE, please show me a level 6 PHB fighter (not tome, no custom artifacts, just the core rules) can defeat a single bulette.

A Hamatula has 126 hp, 29 AC, DR 10/good, SR 23, a weak save of +12, and +22 grapple mod (with an average of 8d8+24=60 damage on a grappling full attack if it hits on the first attack, which it will with +18 to hit).

How the FUCK are level 6 PCs supposed to deal with that short of bullshit spells like shivering touch? For reference, I'll estimate out what a level 6 PC has to do against the Hamatula.

Fighter type:
To hit of +14/9 (6 bab, 1 magic, 6 str, 2 misc) for 2d6+10ish damage per round. Since he's level 6, his weapon isn't holy so he doesn't cut the DR and is going to take many, many rounds to hurt the Hamatula at all.

Really, let's just ignore the fighter types because they just get raped by the DR, AC, and HP too badly.

Caster type:
DC 20 (10 base 3 level 6 stat 1 spell focus) slow/stinking fog effect. Less than 50% chance it even fails the save, and you still can't really harm it.

A Hamatula RAPES most level six characters party or no party. Now, is there anything I missed?
Not single fighter; large groups of PCs. This was in my high-stat, no to low magic item game that had a large group of PCs.
This is exactly what you said:
Judging__Eagle wrote:So, using a CR 11 Hamatula against 4 level 6 PCs is really "not a big deal", and they should be expected to win. When they take a 4th round, is when it's funny, because it's not that they can't win, it's that they are not doing what they need to do, and will probably still win.
Yeah, that is quite literally exactly what you said. This is a forum, not a conversation; it records exactly what you said so you can't pull this "I said something different" crap.
With a total of 11 members, the group was very large; 8 PCs, and 3 Cohorts; 2 wizards, 1 cleric, 1 bard, 1 rogue, 1 ranger/scount, and then 3 Barbarian/Fighters going for either Bear or Lion Warrior, or Frenzied Zerker; Chorots were 1 Formian Warrior, 1 Orc Fighter/Barbarian, 1 Goblin Ranger.

I first threw a Bulette at them when they were level 4 or 5; the Wizard's scorching rays finished off the Bulette after the six melee based PCs did their business. When I threw six at the PCs, they were all in the level 6 zone; and so long as no single PC was mobbed up, the group didn't have to worry about killing them all. At one point one of the Fighters was getting pretty low, but the Cleric had a Fly cast on him, so he just could thumb his nose at enemies and could respond to injured PCs very quickly.
This still doesn't answer my question. Here is the question:
ubernoob wrote:JE, please show me a level 6 PHB fighter (not tome, no custom artifacts, just the core rules) can defeat a single bulette.
For reference, this is a totally reasonable question because just above it you said this:
You, yes you wrote:Nor is using a bunch of CR 7 Bulettes against a large group of level 5-6 PCs. The player characters can murder shit like that. Even using PHB classes like 'fighter' and 'barbarian', they can murder shit like that.
Now answer the question.
The Hamatula fight was against:

-RoW barbarian with adamantine armour, juggernaut, and 20-something str
-wizard and lvl 4 cleric cohort
-lvl 6 rogue

The Hamatula juggled the PCs; and the cleric cohort used Calm Emotions to remove the Fear effects; the Ham used Scorching Rays on the PCs, hurting the wizard. The Barbarian was pretty much 'in the way' for most of the fight, and their DR was enough to shrug off any of the Hamatula's attacks.

Eventually the PCs clued in that the Barb could outgrapple the Hamatula, and then the PCs dogpiled the Fiend, while the Rogue used CdG twice to kill it.

Seriously, the rogue was a character with the soulknife feat that I wrote up; and only used a single dagger, no TWF.

Even gimped looking characters can add up to take down a higher looking challenge, and the CR 11 vs 3 CR 6 1, and 1 CR 4, creatures 'encounter' is something in the 5% of all encounters range. Overpowering, but expected to occur.

I never said it was an 'easy' fight, but seriously, it's just a CR 10 trap. I forgot to mention the Forcecage that was cast around the Barbarian, hemming her in with the Hamatula.

This was the trap that I used, right out of the DMG; the encounter tables were not kind.
DMG Traps Section wrote: Forcecage and Summon Monster VII trap
CR 10; magic device; proximity trigger (alarm); automatic reset; multiple traps (one forcecage trap and one summon monster VII trap that summons a hamatula); spell effect (forcecage, 13th-level wizard), spell effect (summon monster VII, 13th-level wizard, hamatula); Search DC 32; Disable Device DC 32. Cost: 241,000 gp, 7,280 XP. Note: This trap is really one CR 8 trap that creates a forcecage and a second CR 8 trap that summons a hamatula in the same area. If both succeed, the hamatula appears inside the forcecage. These effects are independent of each other.
link

I might misrecall, and the PCs might have been 3 lvl 7 PCs, and a lvl 5 cohort, but I'm pretty sure that they weren't. No Recitation was thrown down. Heck, the PCs won and the Wizard didn't even cast a Haste or Enlarge Person.
Ok, here's what you actually wrote:
JE wrote:So, using a CR 11 Hamatula against 4 level 6 PCs is really "not a big deal", and they should be expected to win. When they take a 4th round, is when it's funny, because it's not that they can't win, it's that they are not doing what they need to do, and will probably still win.
Yes, your words are "Not a big deal"

The barbarian had a +23 grapple mod tops, DR 5 (couldn't find anything in the tome about changing the 'highest applies only' rule), and 60-70 hp. That's assuming that the barbarian took the large size [fiend] feat, obviously.

On a successful grapple check, he deals 2d6+9 or so damage. Since he has no way to make his natural weapons good aligned, that gets cut to an average of 6 damage per check. On each check (success or fail), he takes 1d8+6 damage from barbed defense reduced by his DR for an average of 5 damage per check.

Yes, if the barbarian always makes his grapple checks and never fails he literally kills himself just for trying to grapple the Hamatula.

The barbarian built to be a grapple monster (juggernaut, large size) can actually equal the grapple modifier, but he STILL gets raped. Oh, and as soon as the Hamatula gets out he can greater teleport, recoup and then fuck up the rest of the party since his stealth is well above what the barbarian can do (when the rogue gets to act in the surprise round it is only to get one round grapple raped).

Fuck you, you fucking liar. Even with tome classes outsiders 5 above your own level are fucking hard.
User avatar
Judging__Eagle
Prince
Posts: 4671
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Lake Ontario is in my backyard; Canada

Post by Judging__Eagle »

Actually... the CR system says that PCs should be facing Hamatulas, and winning.

Since, you know, it's 5% of all encounters.

If the PCs can beat those sort of encounters, then their on-par enemies are going to be trashed.
The Gaming Den; where Mathematics are rigorously applied to Mythology.

While everyone's Philosophy is not in accord, that doesn't mean we're not on board.
TarkisFlux
Duke
Posts: 1147
Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2008 9:44 pm
Location: Magic Mountain, CA
Contact:

Post by TarkisFlux »

Judging_Eagle wrote:Actually... the CR system says that PCs should be facing Hamatulas, and winning.

Since, you know, it's 5% of all encounters.

If the PCs can beat those sort of encounters, then their on-par enemies are going to be trashed.
lolwut?

JE, I direct you to the following:
3.5 DMG, pg 50 wrote: Overpowering: The PCs should run. If they don't they will almost certainly lose. The Encounter Level is five or more levels higher than the party level.
The CR system does not mean what you think it means. I suggest you go re-read it.

Edit: I forgot I wrote this so I could point people at it who were confused about the SGT or felt like complaining about / misrepresenting it. It's not entirely appropriate for the circumstances, but it's close.
Last edited by TarkisFlux on Tue Jan 26, 2010 6:24 am, edited 2 times in total.
The wiki you should be linking to when you need a wiki link - http://www.dnd-wiki.org

Fectin: "Ant, what is best in life?"
Ant: "Ethically, a task well-completed for the good of the colony. Experientially, endorphins."
Roy
Prince
Posts: 2772
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:53 pm

Post by Roy »

TarkisFlux wrote:
Judging_Eagle wrote:Actually... the CR system says that PCs should be facing Hamatulas, and winning.

Since, you know, it's 5% of all encounters.

If the PCs can beat those sort of encounters, then their on-par enemies are going to be trashed.
lolwut?

JE, I direct you to the following:
3.5 DMG, pg 50 wrote: Overpowering: The PCs should run. If they don't they will almost certainly lose. The Encounter Level is five or more levels higher than the party level.
The CR system does not mean what you think it means. I suggest you go re-read it.

Edit: I forgot I wrote this so I could point people at it who were confused about the SGT or felt like complaining about / misrepresenting it. It's not entirely appropriate for the circumstances, but it's close.
I was going to say something but you already got it.

The real problem with shit 5 or more levels higher is that you can't run. If it really is higher, and not a case of 'Fighter 11' being passed off as 'Overwhelming' to a level 6 party despite having a stat line comparable to the CR 7 Hill Giant it has no problem countering any of your attempts to escape, often by very simple means like 'running faster than you'.

As such, you are forced to fight due to lack of valid alternatives. Alternately you get some other 'option' that is worse than just having the whole party be annihilated like 'enemy takes your stuff' or 'enemy captures you' but fighting is the only real valid option as escape will just make you die tired. And as such you do need /something/ to deal with those encounters.

But it's not like JE is claiming where you just walk through and curbstomp shit 5+ levels higher. If you are beating them it's not easy. The curbstomping is reserved for routine encounters and lower, which comprise 60% of the total.
Draco_Argentum wrote:
Mister_Sinister wrote:Clearly, your cock is part of the big barrel the server's busy sucking on.
Can someone tell it to stop using its teeth please?
Juton wrote:Damn, I thought [Pathfailure] accidentally created a feat worth taking, my mistake.
Koumei wrote:Shad, please just punch yourself in the face until you are too dizzy to type. I would greatly appreciate that.
Kaelik wrote:No, bad liar. Stop lying.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type I - doing exactly the opposite of what they said they would do.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type II - change for the sake of change.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type III - the illusion of change.
User avatar
Judging__Eagle
Prince
Posts: 4671
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Lake Ontario is in my backyard; Canada

Post by Judging__Eagle »

But it's not like JE is claiming where you just walk through and curbstomp shit 5+ levels higher. If you are beating them it's not easy. The curbstomping is reserved for routine encounters and lower, which comprise 60% of the total.
Exactly.

The CR 11 Hamatula challenged an entire party of PCs, and only their large amount of actions kept it from utterly murdering them all.

Seriously, the CR 4 cleric with a Calm Emotions wand did more to shut down the Hamatula's CC abilities than the other PCs could. If not, the fiend would have been able to solo the scattered PCs.

The entire group was tied up for about.....

-round 1 go to door, Force Cage gets set off, seals in the Barbarian; summons Hamatula
-Hamatula tells them the deal: he can't let them in, that's what his contract says; the force cage will pop after 10 rounds

-round 2: PCs want in anyway (for treasure, not plot or quest completion)

-Barbarian Juggernaut's the Forcecage and busts out like the Kool-Aid man; deals like 50+ damage in 2 swings of her greatsword

-Round 3: Hamatula Fear's Barbarian; she fails her save; falls back; Cleric cohort calms her; other PCs try to deal some damage; Rogue deals minimal Force damage; the Player forgets to hide before throwing his Force dagger, and gets no SA damage

-Round 4: Ham Fears the Rogue; Barbarian comes back, deals some 20-50 or so points of damage. It's been 2+ years since this went down, but I know what that PCs average damage per hit was about a 30 , but never got into the 40's (2d6 weapon, +3d6 rage, +9 str mod (base +6), +2 weapon; 28.5 avg per hit; no TWF, but really, still decent damage).

-Round 5, (seriously, 5 rounds, and they haven't killed it, most fights don't last this long, and honestly, I'm fine with that, the monster is a lot tougher than the PCs, I want them to remember this fight). The Hamatula can't really bypass the 11/(Adamantine) 6, (-) 5 DR of the Barbarian, and she's got enough HP to just keep taking the Hamatula's claws deal an average of 4 (2d6+8; 15), retalitory Barbs (1d8+6, srsly... not gonna deal more than 3 damage ever), the Impale/Grapple Barbs deal roughly 11-ish damage per round (3d8+9; average 22.9 damage).

So, she can afford to take even 10 point damage hits several times before caring. At least 7 such hits, but could have been more, I forget the character's Con, or HP, and they probably had gear too.

So, the 'tank' in the party is in high resilience territory, mostly from DR stacking; the PC also picked up a scaling Cold Resist magic item.

-6 Hamatula backs up, then casts Greater Teleport, to move to the back of the party, since the PCs are in a hallway, and sort of crowded together. It teleports really far back from the PCs, out of charge range, but within Scorching Ray range.

Main objective is to get away from the Barb that can't be hurt in melee, but is dealing ~20 damage beyond DR. The Ham really can't survive 6 rounds of abuse from the tank, plus the other PC's actions.

Secondary objective, get near the other PCs and hurt them, they're not necessarily as dangerous in melee as the Barb is, or haven't been until that point.

Seriously, 2 people in cloth, not armour, and a big stone statue thing that has been casting spells that have failed to do anything useful (spell resistance, and saving throws bitched a lot of the caster's attempts at offense, the PC made the knowledge check, and was told that the monster was more difficult, and tougher, but they tried to use SoDs and Direct Damage spells, instead of Terrain effects, or Ally buffs).

The PCs don't really affect the Fiend, the Barb moves through the PCs to get into charging range.

-7 Wizard gets Scorching Ray'd.

He's wearing some crazy templated race to get Alter Self natural armour abuse. He's also large, his Touch AC is garbage, and the PC takes a pile of damage, a lack of Elemental resists active becomes noticeable, but the PCs don't get it yet. 4d6x2 rays = 14 x 2 = 28; I recall 30 being the rolled value; the PC got scared after that. The Wiz's Cleric cohort works on healing the PC, the other PCs go to try and charge the Fiend.

-7 Hamatula shoots again, Wizard falls, cohort keeps the PC alive. Barb finally reaches, initiates a grapple, it begins, a Pin is attempted, but not successful, the Barb can soak a pile of 11 damage hits with wand healing from the cohort. Rogue comes up, joins grapple, doesn't do jack.

-8 Grapple continues, PCs are patched, and go to the Barb-Hamatula grapple to assist, they don't really do much, seriously, they acted like they caught the dumb, no assists, to make the Barb win, they instead attempt their own Grapple checks.

-9 PCs finally all assist the Barb in her grappling; they finally beat the DC 32 Grapple check (using RoW Grapple rules; our group plays Living Greyhawk in Ontario (Ket), and players are very familiar with every non-lethal manner of fighting, Sleep, Colour Spray, Glitterdust, Saps, Grappling, Merciful Weapons, Swing weapons for Subdual damage, etc.; learning a 'new' grapple system that was easier was not a problem for my group). The Hamatula is pinned, and unless it can make an 8+ roll (6 bab + 6 str + 4 size + 4 assist + 10 base; DC 30) in it's round, it can't escape, unfortunately, I did roll less than an 8, and it finally got pinned. The Rogue spent a full round action to CdG, no TWF, and only a +5 BaB; so 2d6+3d6+9 (Concentration Ranks) about 26.5 Force damage.

-10 PCs cast some buff spells this round, Bull's Str, Enlarge person; the Barb gets +6 more on the Grapple; the Ham needs a 14+ now to break the Pin. The Rogue CdGs again

After 10 rounds, the PCs finally deal 126 points of damage. Seriously, it's like the group dealt 12 or 13 damage over 10 rounds. Unoptimized. The party could have stomped the monster in less time, if they had been more effective in their actions. The Barbarian 'holding' her actions to charge the Hamatula if it was going to cast a spell, the rogue hiding and sniping, getting more SA attacks, the wizard using more buffs, instead of trying to kill something that would make its saves.

The Barb was dealing 20 per attack, and had 2 attacks per round; the Wizard was best when Buffing, or De-Cursing, the Cleric Cohort healed and De-Cursed. The Rogue was only useful when the enemy was helpless, but finished off the monster.

Not an easy fight, but definitely a winnable one. If the PCs had been a bit less effective, they probably would have lost.

Funny thing is... the fight would have gone easier, if the Barb hadn't broken the force cage, and just hammered on the Fiend. It didn't have enough space to escape to, and it couldn't cast any spells without provoking an AoO.

It could however make the DC 22 concentration check, and cast Greater Teleport defensively to get out of the magic box, if it felt it needed to leave; but the Barb would have still been able to break the magic box open.

If the Barb held her action, and waited to full attack if the Hamatula cast a spell, then the fight would have been different.
Last edited by Judging__Eagle on Wed Jan 27, 2010 1:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
The Gaming Den; where Mathematics are rigorously applied to Mythology.

While everyone's Philosophy is not in accord, that doesn't mean we're not on board.
User avatar
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage
Posts: 14757
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Kaelik »

Once again Je, you can't justify building homebrew to a specific level of power based on the assumption that PCs are already at that level of power, then prove the assumption by showing that your hombrew is at the power level.

That's called begging the question.

Stop doing it.

An actual 3.5 party would lose every time without fail. An intelligently played Hamatula would probably win even against a Tome party, but against a non Tome party, even Wizard/Wizard/Cleric/Druid, the Hamatula would win all the damn time.

So sit down and shut up JE. You don't get to claim that a balance point of PC classes being literally twice as good as they are supposed to is okay because the PC classes designed to be twice as good are that good.
DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.

That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
User avatar
God_of_Awesome
Knight-Baron
Posts: 686
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 7:19 am

Post by God_of_Awesome »

Alright, in as few words as possible, and I know this may hard since you are really fucking verbose, tell me what that story illustrated to us. What you wanted it to illustrate.
Frank on the Fighter (Abridged)
FrankTrollman wrote:
God_of_Awesome wrote: Could I inquire on the motive behind the design decisions on the Fighter class?
...

The Fighter is intended to be, like the Wizard, a character who can and does adapt their tactics to the opposition and draws upon player experience to deliver tactical victories. And to do it without "feeling" like it was using Magic.

...

So honestly, when someone tells me "I know the game backwards and forwards, and when I pull out all the stops with the Fighter I totally win!" And my response is "OK, good." Because that's exactly what people report with the Wizard too.

-Username17
Mask_De_H
Duke
Posts: 1995
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 7:17 pm

Post by Mask_De_H »

That with a fuckawesome Barbarian, heals for stupidity, and the power of teamwork you can beat a Hamatula.

Or that J_E is saying that one character *with help* can solo a Hamatula.
FrankTrollman wrote: Halfling women, as I'm sure you are aware, combine all the "fun" parts of pedophilia without any of the disturbing, illegal, or immoral parts.
K wrote:That being said, the usefulness of airships for society is still transporting cargo because it's an option that doesn't require a powerful wizard to show up for work on time instead of blowing the day in his harem of extraplanar sex demons/angels.
Chamomile wrote: See, it's because K's belief in leaving generation of individual monsters to GMs makes him Chaotic, whereas Frank's belief in the easier usability of monsters pre-generated by game designers makes him Lawful, and clearly these philosophies are so irreconcilable as to be best represented as fundamentally opposed metaphysical forces.
Whipstitch wrote:You're on a mad quest, dude. I'd sooner bet on Zeus getting bored and letting Sisyphus put down the fucking rock.
User avatar
Judging__Eagle
Prince
Posts: 4671
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Lake Ontario is in my backyard; Canada

Post by Judging__Eagle »

I'm saying that fights against tougher monsters are possible, they just take more time on the PCs part; not the usual "one-three rounds" before it's mop-up time.

The 'boss' fight is a legitimate encounter, and it will be a definite threat to the PCs if they're not careful. However, the PCs should be able to deal with threats like that 50% of the time without losing party members. Sometimes, the PCs will lose some, or all, of their party, during such fights.

I'll be honest, I'd prefer to hand-wave or adjucate every minor combat or encounter without dice rolls or minimal dice rolls; and worry more about what matters for the adventure; the final battle, or the difficult battles. You know, the ones people will actually remember, or care about.

I don't start doing that until the group has had several sessions under their belt, and everyone knows roughly what everyone else is minimally capable of. Once that's established, the players will always do the same thing, until it stops working, then they have to try something else. So, when the Barbarian tools down a giant, it's not a big surprise, since that's what they've always been capable of, and the PCs expect it. When the Barbarian meets something it can't tool down in a couple of rounds, it knows that the encounter just got serious.
Last edited by Judging__Eagle on Wed Jan 27, 2010 2:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
The Gaming Den; where Mathematics are rigorously applied to Mythology.

While everyone's Philosophy is not in accord, that doesn't mean we're not on board.
Rejakor
Master
Posts: 199
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 6:25 pm
Location: Like Wales, but New and South

Post by Rejakor »

Right.

Let me break this down for everyone.

JE, you are saying several things here. First, you are stating that if given the chance, PCs can and will find imaginative solutions to their problems that emphasize their advantages and protect their weaknesses, acting as a force multiplier for their available resources. Giving them more time/open-mindedness to things like burning the whole damn inn down or tying the rogue's bottle of alchemists fire to a ten foot pole and shoving it through the iron bars to pour down the opening into the enemy's secret well of Explosive Planar Substance A, increases the chance they will be able to do this. I think we can all agree that given enough time/information, humans will be able to construct a plan of action which benefits them and hurts their enemy. Of course, that doesn't guarantee success, and, as always, your mileage may vary.

Secondly, you are making the point that the CR system as written doesn't take into account the destructive power of human ingenuity, but rather is based around rather unimaginative PCs that simply use their class-given options to attack, and are kitted out in stock-standard off-the-shelves, straight-bonus adventuring items. Furthermore, as a lesser matter you raise that the CR system also does not take into account players who use the character creation system to give themselves more resources than a character of their 'CR' could reasonably be assumed to have - i.e. powergamers. You go on to propose a solution to this problem, in that the DM varies both the composition and strength of the encounters within what he/she sees to be the upper and lower limits of the PCs capabilities - the least threatening to the most threatening, but without the not threatening, moving past them with description or a skill check if necessary, or moving through the combat quickly if at all if they are engaged.

Thirdly, you note that the same game system test doesn't cover in much detail imaginative or powergaming PCs, and doesn't test classes against more 'varied' encounters - multiple lesser encounters combined ('trap room' and 'big monster', 'infiltrating monster' and 'combat brute' and 'mook horde') or against both the high and low ends of the spectrum, i.e. against CRs higher or lower than the PCs CR. Which, to be fair, isn't within the scope of the Same Game Test - it's a basic functionality test designed to assemble the disparate elements of a class and see if it's in the same ballpark as other classes in the game, not to test how it reacts to multiple specialized situations. It's a ballpark tester, not a swing power tester.

Fourthly, you raise the point that if the PCs find a system that works, they will generally use that system as long as it does work, and that encounters that force them to develop a new system, either in deep planning underground or on the fly, are the ones that they will remember and talk about later, always the sign as a world shaper that you've done a good job. You suggest that forcing the PCs to develop new means to counter specific threats is a good thing, as it both adds to the narrative and makes the game more enjoyable for all involved.

As for your first two points, I largely agree with them. Your third I have some reservations about, since you are assuming a level of detail in the Same Game Test that I don't think exists, or was ever supposed to exist. Fourth, again, in principle, I agree with. However. The way you have said it seems to indicate that you think that the results you have garnered with your groups will be indicative of all future results.

Let's take a look at the example you've given us, the Hamatula. The Hamatula popped out on the party in an enclosed environment - a classic closet troll, and despite having spent a lot of it's 'monster points' on being an npc-type monster, immunities, and spell-likes it still made a decent closet troll. However, it made several very stupid mistakes. In the beginning, it had no idea of it's foes or their capabilities, so fair enough it didn't leave the barbarian in the cage (as it should have, not knowing about the Juggernaught feat). However, after that, it didn't Grab the cleric and murder him with 7d8+21 damage (claw-Grab-Impale-free claw attack for grappling), it didn't have any equipment (fair enough, it was in bed or in the bath or something, but a npc monster NOT having equipment DOES lower the CR), it didn't use either unholy blight or order's wrath on the party, despite the fact it would have gotten all of them, it didn't Hold Person the barbarian at any point, it didn't 'Summon Homies', when it ran off it used scorching ray instead of major image to make it look like it had cast wall of fire, or, hell, even a readied hold person, and when it got low on hitpoints it didn't bug out and come back later with Hide to murder them in their sleep. (It was grappled, but spell-likes have no somatic or material component, and therefore don't require a grapple check, only a concentration check, DC 27 for greater teleport. No worries, i'm willing to put this down to 'spell-likes in a grapple is confusing'.) Furthermore, that party? You had a wizard using an obscure non-standard race and abusing Alter Self cheese by dumpster-diving for something straight off the CO boards like the Ancestor Dwarf, and an incredibly well built Barbarian with several dozen more hitpoints than the average barbarian of that level (I computed the average damage it would have taken in that fight), 5 more DR than it should have had (DR doesn't stack), built almost entirely in way that shut down the Hamatula's advantages, and more like an 8th level or higher character than 6th. The cleric, like all clerics, is the natural enemy of the devil, nixing many of it's abilities. The rogue was basically a standard ye old crappy rogue. So we had a weakened, lower-CR-than-normal unlucky Hamatula that made some silly decisions against a party of exceptional 6th level characters, who were lucky, in both rolls and having just enough hp and spells and damage to take it down, and (eventually) chose the correct course of action and managed to take it down.

This does not indicate that you can increase the CR by 5 for any group of PCs. What it indicates is that throwing certain higher-CRed monsters against the party can lead to hard and memorable fights and that some monsters may not be listed at their correct CR - use your own judgement in building encounters that are right for your party.

Which, taken as a whole are some interesting points and, while I disagree with some of them, on the whole they're mostly worthwhile and valid.

-J
User avatar
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage
Posts: 14757
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Kaelik »

I think you are attributing far too much to JE, I don't think he is even remotely aware that the PCs will be using X to gain a force multipleier blah blah. He genuinely thinks that right level of balance is for a PC to be CR level +5 enemy.

And he's dumb and wrong, because the fact of the matter is that monsters aren't retarded, and if you stop playing them like retards, they can easily win any fight like that, even against his Tome Barbarian and Rogues using his own custom feat and Alter Selfed Dwarf Ancestor Wizards.
DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.

That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Rejakor
Master
Posts: 199
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 6:25 pm
Location: Like Wales, but New and South

Post by Rejakor »

Kaelik: Read over what JE has said. Look at it in the context of what I have said. You'll find that he has in fact covered those points, however he has done so in a rambling manner(one that I am also often prone to) and has included examples and tangential thoughts in between the actual points.

And actually, that sentence you just wrote? It's wrong. Yes, even a level 1 expert can defeat 20th level characters if you give him plot armour, and have him do all the right things at the right time and 'make' all his skill checks to convince the local king etc, find the one guy who has the power to stop the PCs and the reason, etc etc. However, if you are being 'fair' and playing the npcs as they 'would' act, there are MANY situations where a group of PCs can win fights against a monster with a CR higher than their level. Furthermore, 2 Tome Fighters and 2 master specialist wizards will win against CRed opponents a lot higher than them than a party of 2 PHB monks and 2 PHB fighters.

So yes, depending on whether it's a Hamatula or it's a Hydra, and depending on whether they're overpowered or underpowered, a party could conceivably defeat an enemy up to 5 CR's above them. Hell, given the 'right circumstances' a single level 1 expert can defeat a Balor. By which I mean being an elf, farming for 1,000 years, buying 50 ridiculous traps and a single use 'summon balor' wondrous item, rigging up a room and pressing the button.

Also, I realize that you like to accuse JE of bringing in homebrew that is incredibly overpowered, but the feat he's referring to seems to allow the rogue to only wield a single weapon at a time and do force damage. Which is, honestly, absolutely fucking terrible for a rogue. So against a 'tome barbarian, weak rogue, and alter-self-cheesed dwarf ancestor wizard', is a more honest appraisal.
User avatar
Archmage
Knight-Baron
Posts: 757
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:05 pm

Post by Archmage »

See, though, it doesn't matter that a party "can" beat an encouter 5 CRs above their ECL. By the book, that kind of encounter is supposed to be overwhelmingly difficult, and according to the DMG, the PCs "will almost certainly lose" if they die, so they should flee rather than fight.

Which means that if your characters are winning ECL+5 encounters with any reasonable frequency, a) your characters are brokenly overpowered or b) the CR system is totally fucked.

We pretty much universally acknowledge b, but that doesn't stop a from being true. The fact is that CR = party level is supposed to be "a challenge that seriously threatens at least one member of the group." Same-level challenges are not supposed to be curb-stomps. Arguing anything else is claiming A != A and makes you insane.
P.C. Hodgell wrote:That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.
shadzar wrote:i think the apostrophe is an outdated idea such as is hyphenation.
User avatar
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage
Posts: 14757
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Kaelik »

Rejakor wrote:Kaelik: Read over what JE has said. Look at it in the context of what I have said. You'll find that he has in fact covered those points, however he has done so in a rambling manner(one that I am also often prone to) and has included examples and tangential thoughts in between the actual points.

And actually, that sentence you just wrote? It's wrong. Yes, even a level 1 expert can defeat 20th level characters if you give him plot armour, and have him do all the right things at the right time and 'make' all his skill checks to convince the local king etc, find the one guy who has the power to stop the PCs and the reason, etc etc. However, if you are being 'fair' and playing the npcs as they 'would' act, there are MANY situations where a group of PCs can win fights against a monster with a CR higher than their level. Furthermore, 2 Tome Fighters and 2 master specialist wizards will win against CRed opponents a lot higher than them than a party of 2 PHB monks and 2 PHB fighters.

So yes, depending on whether it's a Hamatula or it's a Hydra, and depending on whether they're overpowered or underpowered, a party could conceivably defeat an enemy up to 5 CR's above them. Hell, given the 'right circumstances' a single level 1 expert can defeat a Balor. By which I mean being an elf, farming for 1,000 years, buying 50 ridiculous traps and a single use 'summon balor' wondrous item, rigging up a room and pressing the button.

Also, I realize that you like to accuse JE of bringing in homebrew that is incredibly overpowered, but the feat he's referring to seems to allow the rogue to only wield a single weapon at a time and do force damage. Which is, honestly, absolutely fucking terrible for a rogue. So against a 'tome barbarian, weak rogue, and alter-self-cheesed dwarf ancestor wizard', is a more honest appraisal.
1) I have read over what JE has said. And while he has undoubtedly said things similar to "PCs are smart" and other such things, mostly because at this point his incessant typing has caused him to actually type every sentence it is even possible for a human being to type, but that is very different from saying that PCs apply intelligent tactics in specific situations to gain asymmetric force is the cause of PCs being able to take on Monsters higher than their level +5.

In fact, claiming that it is the cause is directly contradictory to many things he has claimed, such as that a PC party of 4 level 6 characters can easily take out a Hamatula, and that if it takes them more than four rounds, it's because they are using inferior tactics, but they will still win.

2) That sentence I wrote is correct. You might notice how it says "can easily any fight like that" Not "Will all the time no matter what" not "Any possible fight at all".

Your bullshit wankfest about level 1 commoners is a waste of space get rid of it. I'm not talking about plot armoring the monster, I'm talking about using it like it should be used. Yes, some parties in some situations will always beat a CR whatthefuckever mindless giant scorpion. No one cares.

You don't get to fight all your fights against mindless giant Scorpions, so when you assume that PCs are capable of having 80+% success rates against CR level+5 foes, the first time the DM picks a dragon or outsider and plays it even remotely intelligent (har har Fiendish Scorpion, you know what I mean) they will die in a fire, possibly quite literally.

3) You should probably actually read the feat before you make bold pronouncements of what it does.

Here's what the feat actually does:

0: "As an free action action, you may create any melee or thrown weapon or weapons which you are proficient with in your main hand and/or your off hand(s). You may only do create a Mental Weapon once per attack that you make." Note the explicit mention of offhands, do you feel retarded yet? You should. It also makes them automatically magic scaling with level to +2 at level 6 as a 0 rank ability.

4: Ranged attacks with weapon. 10ft increment, don't have to throw it, just full attack things within 50ft of you. It also grants +4 damage to all attacks at this level.

9: Does Force damage, thus bypassing DR ect.

Everything later doesn't apply to a sixth level character, so meh.

Is it more powerful than most Tome combat feats? Maybe, Maybe not.

But since my explicit claim is and always has been that Races of War martials are built to a balance point that is far in excess of the actual balance point of the Same Game Test, and higher than the average Wizard, if it's only equal with Combat feats it still proves my point. Which is why I call him out just as much for using a Tome Barbarian instead of a PHB one as I do for him using a feat he created himself.

Because the entire point is that the same game test makes a specific claim about balance, and goal for balance, and if you use material which was designed either explicitly or accidentally to violate the same game test, that is not a reflection on the same game tests claim and goal.

JE thinks that all PCs are that good. He uses examples of Specifically only the most powerful PCs fighting monsters designed to be caster hybrids being used without spells.

He is clearly either retarded or disingenuous or both. Based on his post collection, it is easy to see that he is definitely retarded. Your claims about why JE believes that level +5 is the appropriate balance point are incorrect. If they are reasons you personally believe that level +4 maybe 5 in some circumstances is okay, that's your own damn business.

But stop reflecting your own views of what is sensible onto JEs posts before you read them, and then confirmation biasing yourself into thinking that JE is sensible.

He's not, he's genuinely insane, and his long rambling screeds have made very clear at multiple points that he thinks that any even moderatly well designed party should be regularly fighting monsters of CR = level +5 and winning regularly.

That is wrong, plainly and obviously, and even Frank, who agrees that "PCs will be smart and leverage asymmetric power into defeating things well in advance of their level." Can clearly see how incredibly retarded JE is, and how he is clearly not saying that.
DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.

That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
User avatar
Josh_Kablack
King
Posts: 5318
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Online. duh

Post by Josh_Kablack »

He's not, he's genuinely insane, and his long rambling screeds have made very clear at multiple points that he thinks that any even moderatly well designed party should be regularly fighting monsters of CR = level +5 and winning regularly.
A 3.x D&D party that operates with at least a few of these:
  • At least moderately optimized individual characters
  • Inter-character synergies
  • Strong rules knowledge
  • PC-empowering houserules or expansion material.
  • More than four PCs
  • A 1-2 encounter workday, and the knowledge that it will only be 1-2 encounters.
  • The willingness to burn expendable magic items
  • A DM who does not cheese monster advancement or otherwise game the EL/CR system to compensate for PC abilities
  • A DM who is not intentionally antagonistic
  • Players with knowledge of the quirks of the DM's game style
Is going to be able to take on CR = Level +5 challenges and have a decent shot at winning - and that's not even a sign that the CR system is broken.

**Without any of those above listed factors, just going by the 3.x RAW**

Level +4 is supposed to be about 50/50 and on average burn through about half of the party's resources.

Level +5 is supposed to favor team monster, and burn through more than half of the party's resources. But level +5 is not supposed to be unbeatable, and level +5 is not supposed to burn through all the party's resources.

**And when you have a game with a few of the factors listed above, they can influence things in the PCs favor enough that the odds and resource requirements shift. Thus, with those factors, it's entirely possible to have a game where the PCs do beat a majority CR+5 (or higher) encounters - despite the expectations of the CR system.**

And beyond that I have no clue what yinz are even arguing about?


{EDIT} Italicized bits added for clarity
Last edited by Josh_Kablack on Thu Feb 04, 2010 2:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
"But transportation issues are social-justice issues. The toll of bad transit policies and worse infrastructure—trains and buses that don’t run well and badly serve low-income neighborhoods, vehicular traffic that pollutes the environment and endangers the lives of cyclists and pedestrians—is borne disproportionately by black and brown communities."
User avatar
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage
Posts: 14757
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Kaelik »

Well since at least two of those are "increase party level" or "decrease monster CR" and two more are "play with with borked material like PCs having Shadow over the sun" or "Make up your own borked material" and another two are "give the PCs way more wealth than expected" and "have the DM purposefully play monsters like idiots IE hamatula's who just stand there and never use an SLA"

Yeah, if you have multiples of those going on, you can beat them. Hell, if you have only one of those 6 you can beat them.

But if you make an actual four person party and play them through four encounters a day and don't give them more wealth to compensate for them using staffs of everyone casts Holy Word at higher than their character level and you don't play the monsters like retards to make it easy on them, they can't.

If every once in a while you fight a CR level+5 enemy, and its your only fight that day, or you had knowledge to prepare or whatever, that's one thing.

But that's also not even remotely close to what JE is saying, so I have no idea what that is supposed to contribute to the conversation.
DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.

That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Mask_De_H
Duke
Posts: 1995
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 7:17 pm

Post by Mask_De_H »

Wait, hold on. The Same Game Test works under the assumption that CR = Character Level on the basis that an NPC using PC classes at a certain level has a CR of his level right?

That being said, wasn't the 4 man party supposed to clock in at around Average Party Level + 4 for an appropriate CR challenge? So Josh is pretty much spot on and the only real problem is that the Barbarian in J_E's game pretty much could (and did) take the Hamatula by himself and that he espouses that a character of Level X should be mowing down CR X monsters, instead of going 50/50 with them on average? Which isn't a part of this thread's discussion.

My brain is full of fuck. Why does this thread keep going?
FrankTrollman wrote: Halfling women, as I'm sure you are aware, combine all the "fun" parts of pedophilia without any of the disturbing, illegal, or immoral parts.
K wrote:That being said, the usefulness of airships for society is still transporting cargo because it's an option that doesn't require a powerful wizard to show up for work on time instead of blowing the day in his harem of extraplanar sex demons/angels.
Chamomile wrote: See, it's because K's belief in leaving generation of individual monsters to GMs makes him Chaotic, whereas Frank's belief in the easier usability of monsters pre-generated by game designers makes him Lawful, and clearly these philosophies are so irreconcilable as to be best represented as fundamentally opposed metaphysical forces.
Whipstitch wrote:You're on a mad quest, dude. I'd sooner bet on Zeus getting bored and letting Sisyphus put down the fucking rock.
User avatar
RobbyPants
King
Posts: 5201
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:11 pm

Post by RobbyPants »

So far as I understand it, yes.
User avatar
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage
Posts: 14757
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Kaelik »

Mask_De_H wrote:Wait, hold on. The Same Game Test works under the assumption that CR = Character Level on the basis that an NPC using PC classes at a certain level has a CR of his level right?

That being said, wasn't the 4 man party supposed to clock in at around Average Party Level + 4 for an appropriate CR challenge? So Josh is pretty much spot on and the only real problem is that the Barbarian in J_E's game pretty much could (and did) take the Hamatula by himself and that he espouses that a character of Level X should be mowing down CR X monsters, instead of going 50/50 with them on average? Which isn't a part of this thread's discussion.

My brain is full of fuck. Why does this thread keep going?
Honestly, Josh appears to be saying multiple things some of which are obvious, some of which are crazy and all of which are too vague to be analyzed at all because every sentence involves the word "some" representing a continuum from one to four, or something equally vague.

As for the Same Game Test as it relates to a party:

1) A party should have a 50% chance against enemies of CR = party level +4.

2) The same game test only works when you assume that it is the only fight occurring that day.

3) I know for a fact that JE thinks that PCs can take 3-4 CR = level + 5 enemies in one day without recovering resources.

I have no fucking clue what Josh thinks, as one of his limiting factors is 1-2 a day, but I have no idea how many limiting factors need to be in play or to what extent, so if you ban Shadow over the sun, I don't know if he thinks a party of four can take 4 fights a day at CR 11 when the party level is 6.
DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.

That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Quantumboost
Knight-Baron
Posts: 968
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Quantumboost »

Kaelik wrote:As for the Same Game Test as it relates to a party:

1) A party should have a 50% chance against enemies of CR = party level +4.
That's inaccurate, though the inaccuracy doesn't impact anything after that. A party should have a 50% chance against enemies of the party's Encounter Level. The "party level + 4" bit only applies when you specifically have a party of 4 characters. As opposed to a party of two, three, five, six, etc. characters.
User avatar
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage
Posts: 14757
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Kaelik »

Quantumboost wrote:
Kaelik wrote:As for the Same Game Test as it relates to a party:

1) A party should have a 50% chance against enemies of CR = party level +4.
That's inaccurate, though the inaccuracy doesn't impact anything after that. A party should have a 50% chance against enemies of the party's Encounter Level. The "party level + 4" bit only applies when you specifically have a party of 4 characters. As opposed to a party of two, three, five, six, etc. characters.
Um, since we are sort of specifically talking about parties of four (I think? I don't know what Josh is talking about) that would be why I said specifically party level +4.

Yes if you change the parties EL, that would change the designed for EL, but that's precisely the reason I scoff at Josh saying "As long as you hav a party of twelve, you can take CR = level +5 challenges"
DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.

That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Rejakor
Master
Posts: 199
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 6:25 pm
Location: Like Wales, but New and South

Post by Rejakor »

In fact, claiming that it is the cause is directly contradictory to many things he has claimed, such as that a PC party of 4 level 6 characters can easily take out a Hamatula, and that if it takes them more than four rounds, it's because they are using inferior tactics, but they will still win.
Actually, he's claiming that a fight that takes more than 4 rounds is a memorable and hard fight for the PCs. He has also claimed that some parties can take out encounters of higher than their CR with a success rate of higher than the 5% someone listed. I'm a bit tired right now, and I might have missed it, but I can't see where he's said what you just said he's said.
2) That sentence I wrote is correct. You might notice how it says "can easily any fight like that" Not "Will all the time no matter what" not "Any possible fight at all".
You are right. I did read your sentence wrong. I apologize. However, I still think it is incorrect. Whether or not a monster can easily win a fight against a party made up of characters 5 CRs below it depends on the monster, the party, and the circumstances.

I'm not saying that CR+5 should be the balance point for a party of 4 characters, and that they should fight 3-4 CR+5 encounters each day. I'm pretty sure JE isn't saying that either. What I am saying is 'depending on the circumstances, the group, and the specific encounter, you should alter the CR to make the encounter challenging, instead of sticking to the 'appropriate' CR even if the format of the encounter makes that trivial or impossible'. That's pretty much all i've been saying this entire time.
But since my explicit claim is and always has been that Races of War martials are built to a balance point that is far in excess of the actual balance point of the Same Game Test, and higher than the average Wizard, if it's only equal with Combat feats it still proves my point. Which is why I call him out just as much for using a Tome Barbarian instead of a PHB one as I do for him using a feat he created himself.
What, really? And your argument doesn't revolve around the fact that an optimized Tome character can handle opponents of his CR with a higher than 50% chance? If I optimize a monster, it can do exactly the same thing. If I build a monster crappily (using HD advancement etc, a mixed encounter of ill-assorted monsters) it will lose greater than 50% of the time, just as if I make a shitty Tome character.

Also, i'm pretty sure Josh didn't say any of that stuff that you are inferring. I'd go through it all and link what you're saying to what he actually said and point out the actual meaning, but.. I can't be fucked. If you honestly think that the CR system is infallible and that the PHB classes are balanced against it if you juuuust take leap attack and shock trooper, then feel free.
Quantumboost
Knight-Baron
Posts: 968
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Quantumboost »

Kaelik wrote:Um, since we are sort of specifically talking about parties of four (I think? I don't know what Josh is talking about) that would be why I said specifically party level +4.
If collective-you were, that wasn't clear to me. But fair enough.
Post Reply