PDA

View Full Version : Quick LA/HD question



lsfreak
2009-06-24, 12:21 AM
1: A level 3 character should be a CR3 encounter.
2: A level 6 character should be a CR6 encounter.

3: An ogre is a CR3 encounter.
4: An ogre as a character has 4HD and a +2LA, ECL6, and therefore should be CR6.

...Something here doesn't add up.

Just making sure I didn't miss anything, and that this is one of the reasons that CR is so broken.

Eloel
2009-06-24, 12:28 AM
1: A level 3 character should be a CR3 encounter.
2: A level 6 character should be a CR6 encounter.

3: An ogre is a CR3 encounter.
4: An ogre as a character has 4HD and a +2LA, ECL6, and therefore should be CR6.

...Something here doesn't add up.

Just making sure I didn't miss anything, and that this is one of the reasons that CR is so broken.

You missed one thing. A CR6 encounter is supposed to be for 4 ECL6 characters, not for a single one. Thus, a single ECL6 character is not CR6...

lsfreak
2009-06-24, 12:35 AM
A single ECL6 character is CR6, according to the DMG. It is a challenge that 4 6th-level characters would expend roughly 25% of their resources to fight.

EDIT: Though there's apparently discrepancy there, too. The DMG lists an ogre with 1 level of a PC class as CR3, while the SRD lists an ogre with no class levels as CR 3. See page 40 of the DMG.

Myrmex
2009-06-24, 12:37 AM
CR is a different metric than LA. CR measures the power of a monster vs. four player characters, while LA compares the power between players.

Keld Denar
2009-06-24, 12:42 AM
EDIT: Though there's apparently discrepancy there, too. The DMG lists an ogre with 1 level of a PC class as CR3, while the SRD lists an ogre with no class levels as CR 3. See page 40 of the DMG.

Non-associated class levels? They don't really count toward CR if their fractions are low enough to round down.

lsfreak
2009-06-24, 12:48 AM
Non-associated class levels? They don't really count toward CR if their fractions are low enough to round down.

DMG also lists an ogre with no levels as CR2, while the SRD and MM both lists nonclassed ogres as CR3 :p

EDIT:
Let's try this again. An ogre with 4 levels of barbarian is a CR7 encounter. A human with 7 levels of barbarian is a CR7 encounter. They should both be equal challenges to fight.

But then, one is ECL7 and one is ECL11. So while they are equal challenges to fight, the ogre barbarian apparently has 4 levels of power on the human barbarian and should be fighting things 4 levels higher. Something just doesn't quite seem right when two things are equal fighters on one side of the DM screen and 4 levels apart on the other.

(And I'm not saying there shouldn't be LA or anything, just that the LA/CR/HD system is screwy.)

Myrmex
2009-06-24, 01:09 AM
The ogre was originally a CR 2 monster in 3.0, but got pushed up to 3 in 3.5, which they definitely deserve, since they have a ton of strength, reach, and wield their weapons with two hands.

Myrmex
2009-06-24, 01:12 AM
Let's try this again. An ogre with 4 levels of barbarian is a CR7 encounter. A human with 7 levels of barbarian is a CR7 encounter. They should both be equal challenges to fight.

But then, one is ECL7 and one is ECL11. So while they are equal challenges to fight, the ogre barbarian apparently has 4 levels of power on the human barbarian and should be fighting things 4 levels higher. Something just doesn't quite seem right when two things are equal fighters on one side of the DM screen and 4 levels apart on the other.

For two reasons:
1. Wizards pretty much came out and declared that LAs are to high to make PHB humanoids the dominant races.
2. Ogres get size and huge stat boosts that make them more powerful than other characters. A beholder that can cast 9 spells a round as free actions, including the powerful disintegrate, is a tough encounter. A character that can cast disintegrate once per round as a free action is a campaign smasher.

The Professor
2009-06-24, 01:16 AM
CR, LA and ECL are not always an exact science, and sometimes you'll find there to be... inconsistencies. You can't measure PC power with CR. Otherwise you start adding templates with enormous LA but little CR in comparison, like a vampire.

I find that the best way to do it, is to stress test things from group to group as to what's reasonable. Making an ogre barbarian 4 ECL 7 in a game with newcomers would be folly, but might not be unreasonable if you have a Wizard in the party named Emperor Tippy.

However, my idea of game balance is pretty flawed.

Myrmex
2009-06-24, 01:22 AM
CR, LA and ECL are not always an exact science, and sometimes you'll find there to be... inconsistencies. You can't measure PC power with CR. Otherwise you start adding templates with enormous LA but little CR in comparison, like a vampire.

I find that the best way to do it, is to stress test things from group to group as to what's reasonable. Making an ogre barbarian 4 ECL 7 in a game with newcomers would be folly, but might not be unreasonable if you have a Wizard in the party named Emperor Tippy.

However, my idea of game balance is pretty flawed.

I'd say that your analysis here is spot on.

LA and CR are largely irrelevant to the other, since they compare fundamentally different things. CR, in general, can be as much as +4/-4. You can build a kobold that has a 50% chance to TPK a level 3 party with a standard action, despite having a CR of <1.

Duke of URL
2009-06-24, 06:24 AM
The answer is simply that racial HD are not worth +1 CR. (Associated) class levels, which provide much, much more than racial HD, are worth +1 CR. The core rules (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/improvingMonsters.htm#addingHitDice) even state this:


Animal, magical beast, monstrous humanoid -- +1 [CR] per 3 HD added

By extension, that means that the portion of CR for a monstrous humanoid that is derived from RHD is RHD/3.

4 RHD / 3 + 2 LA is approximately equal to CR 3.

Frog Dragon
2009-06-24, 06:44 AM
Fear the Frost Giant Wizard.

Yeah.

A frost giant is CR 9 and ECL 18

So say.. The frost giant wizard CR:ed wants to be a wizard. A CR 20 one. So he gets 9 levels of wizard at nonassociated for CR 13. The gets 7 more for associated. CR 20 Frost giant wizard has 16 levels in wizard. This guy's ECL is 34

Now lets put a party of four frost giants. All have two class levels. ECL:ed. I probably don't need to tell you that this is total TPK:ery. It is also way under CR:ed against a normal party of characters due to ridiculously high saves, HP and other crap in addition to almost comparable casting ability.

The system is supposed to translate ECL to CR, but then why the exact same characters have wildly differing CR:s and ECL:s? The system is flawed.

Duke of URL
2009-06-24, 06:53 AM
Fear the Frost Giant Wizard.

Yeah.

A frost giant is CR 9 and ECL 18

So say.. The frost giant wizard CR:ed wants to be a wizard. A CR 20 one. So he gets 9 levels of wizard at nonassociated for CR 13. The gets 7 more for associated. CR 20 Frost giant wizard has 16 levels in wizard. This guy's ECL is 34

You don't think a party of 4 20th level characters could handle that without too much trouble? (i.e., the definition of "CR 20")

Tsotha-lanti
2009-06-24, 06:55 AM
I'd be way more afraid of a 20th-level human wizard than a 16th-level frost giant wizard. Both have the same CR, but those 9th-level spells make quite a difference (bigger than even 10 extra d8 HD and +5 hp/level for +10 Con). Basically, the frost giant wizard can either be the equivalent of a CR 16 caster or a CR 16 melee combatant, but not both at the same time.

I suppose at CR 21, the frost giant will come out ahead, since it will get 9th-level spells and qualify for Epic Spellcasting at wizard 17 (since it's maximum ranks for class skills are now 34, well over the required 24).

'course, those CR guidelines are just guidelines. A melee monster self-buffer cleric frost giant will be much scarier than a fighter frost giant, despite those cleric levels being non-associated.

kamikasei
2009-06-24, 07:08 AM
The system is supposed to translate ECL to CR

Where does it say that? Given that a single template will have different CR and LA adjustments listed, it's clearly not intended that they be equal, well before you get in to monkeying about with nonassociated class levels and such trickery.

Frog Dragon
2009-06-24, 07:51 AM
The DMG states that a, say level 6 human fighter is a CR 6 opponent.

kamikasei
2009-06-24, 07:59 AM
The DMG states that a, say level 6 human fighter is a CR 6 opponent.

That does not mean that "the system is supposed to translate ECL into CR". (For one thing, that statement is kind of meaningless. Neither the ECL nor the CR systems are meant to translate between one another. I'm assuming you mean something more like "the game system is supposed to have ECL and CR work out as equal to one another". Please correct me if I'm wrong.) It means that one specific translation of ECL into CR leaves them equal. Others don't.

ECL and CR are separate systems. One measures power in the hands of a player, one measures power in the hands of a DM. CR is supposed to be about single fights, ECL includes abilities that can have profound impacts on the game world when used over the course of a campaign. Both systems are full of holes, but not simply because they don't always work out to the same value.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-06-24, 08:18 AM
The DMG states that a, say level 6 human fighter is a CR 6 opponent.

That indicates absolutely no equivalency between CR and ECL. It's simply that if your only HD are levels in a class, those are effectively your associated class and determine your CR at the 1:1 rate for associated classes.

It's plainly obvious that CR and LA are hugely different for a reason. An Efreeti's wish ability is infinitely more powerful in the hands of PCs. +20 Str is much more useful to a PC than a monster. And so on.

Duke of URL
2009-06-24, 08:20 AM
The DMG states that a, say level 6 human fighter is a CR 6 opponent.

Yeah, because it's a CR 1/2 creature (at best) with 6 associated class levels. Has nothing to do, except tangentially, with ECL.

Myrmex
2009-06-24, 12:09 PM
I'd be way more afraid of a 20th-level human wizard than a 16th-level frost giant wizard. Both have the same CR, but those 9th-level spells make quite a difference (bigger than even 10 extra d8 HD and +5 hp/level for +10 Con). Basically, the frost giant wizard can either be the equivalent of a CR 16 caster or a CR 16 melee combatant, but not both at the same time.

Unless it went all gishy. Putting prestige classes on monsters is fun. :smallsmile:

Tsotha-lanti
2009-06-24, 12:12 PM
Unless it went all gishy. Putting prestige classes on monsters is fun. :smallsmile:

A frost giant wizard/spellsword/abjurant champion/eldritch knight is a pretty different deal, yes; and only the wizard levels (all, what's that, 3?) would be non-associated, so you'd get a fairly high CR. A frost giant wizard 16 has very little on even a human wizard 17.

Benejeseret
2009-06-24, 01:08 PM
I have struggled with this much myself.

The thing is that ECL and CR 'should' be related in some way, because many of us like to play as monsters, and I as a DM really like running monster games.

Using your Frost Giant Wizard example I find it astonishing that everyone agrees that a human wizard of equal CR would decimate the Frost Giant Wizard many times over and is far superior as a monster or character.

Yet it is the Frost Giant Wizard that ECL says is vastly more superior so much that a 16 level caster giant needs to play along-side a 34 class level human if they were PC's...


One fix I have been toying with - to reduce HD 'levels' toward ECL. Simply put, one HD of monstrous humanoid does not in any way, shape, form, or even looking at it all squinty-eyed does it possibly compare to a class level. It is quite possibly worth less then NPC levels.

So, I have been trying out the HD to ECL conversions using advancing monsters as a guide-line.

Aberration, construct, elemental, fey, giant, humanoid, ooze, plant, undead, vermin = +1 per 4 HD added
Animal, magical beast, monstrous humanoid = +1 per 3 HD added
Dragon, outsider = +1 per 2 HD
All LA apply in full and even fractions of above count as full.

Ogre= 4HD +2 LA = ECL3 (normally 6)
Frost Giant= 14HD +4LA = ECL9 (normally 16)
Gnoll= 2HD +1LA = ECL2 (normally 3)
Succubus= 6HD +6LA = ECL9 (normally 12)
Young Red Dragon= 13HD +6LA = ECL13 (normally 19)

This may overpower monster PC's...but so far it seems ok in play

The real issue is abilities that are based off of HD rather than class and possibly HP with a high CON but again I have found things mostly balance OK in game and am open to fine tuning suggestions

kamikasei
2009-06-24, 01:16 PM
Yet it is the Frost Giant Wizard that ECL says is vastly more superior so much that a 16 level caster giant needs to play along-side a 34 class level human if they were PC's...

Simply because the ECL system is set up to punish you if you play anything other than a 1HD, no-LA humanoid. Racial hit die are treated as of equal value to class levels, although they're clearly not. LA is overinflated. The CR system is imperfect, but the ECL system's flaws are deliberate.

Keld Denar
2009-06-24, 01:19 PM
It states in the DMG that the biggest component of LA is the fact that some abilities and powers are more useful in the hands of PCs than NPCs. Things like big stat bumps and at will SLAs are generally more useful in the hands of a PC who uses them every day, 3-4 times a day, than an NPC who shows up, uses it twice, and then gets gibbed by the heros.

Take, for example, a Hound Archon. Its got a WHOPPING +6 LA. Why so high? I'm guessing +3 of it is from Greater Teleport at will, +1 for the exceptional stats and +2 for the SR and other misc SLAs. As a character, it would be a 12th level character, a level where a decent caster can often teleport himself and friends as much as you need in a given day. Any lower than that, though, and the ability to transport yourself and up to 50#s of loot anywhere in world, including places you've never been too, every 6 seconds, is CRAZY. In combat against PCs though, it would mostly be to pop in unannounced ambush style, to get out of various movement restrictions such as grapple or fog, or to escape when badly beaten. Useful? Yes. As useful as it would be in the hands of a PC? Certainly not.

So, an ECL12 character isn't always CR12 due to the weight of LA on an NPC. LA should be reduced by a heavy number, like half or quarter, for it to add to CR.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-06-24, 01:26 PM
Simply because the ECL system is set up to punish you if you play anything other than a 1HD, no-LA humanoid. Racial hit die are treated as of equal value to class levels, although they're clearly not. LA is overinflated. The CR system is imperfect, but the ECL system's flaws are deliberate.

The thing is, it's very unclear whether LA is supposed to cover all racial abilities by itself (like it does with templates, such as the +8 LA vampire), or whether the HD are also supposed to cover racial abilities. The latter is the option that monster classes went with, shoehorning the progression to the same ECL of HD + LA, but it still results in pretty underpowered levels (at least in most cases).

Devils_Advocate
2009-06-24, 03:02 PM
Just making sure I didn't miss anything, and that this is one of the reasons that CR is so broken.
What you missed: An ogre built as a character has

- rolled, point-bought, or elite array stats modified by the ogre's racial modifiers, instead or an array of 11 11 11 10 10 10 modified by the ogre's ability modifiers,
- wealth appropriate to a character of its ECL, instead of the crap gear that an ogre gets, and
- feats and skills that can be chosen to play to its strength, instead of the crap feats a MM ogre gets.

Now, that said, a whole bunch of monsters have inappropriate LAs and/or inappropriate CRs.

As I mentioned in another thread recently, the official formulas for CR and ECL work better as rough guidelines than hard-and-fast rules. It would have been nice if they had come out and admitted that and essentially added "Adjust as needed", like they did for magic item pricing.


The thing is, it's very unclear whether LA is supposed to cover all racial abilities by itself (like it does with templates, such as the +8 LA vampire), or whether the HD are also supposed to cover racial abilities.
A monster character should be about as useful to a player as a human character of the same ECL. It should have whatever LA gives it the appropriate ECL.

(Of course, two human characters of the same level should be roughly equally useful, but they often aren't. So you have to decide what standard you're balancing against in the first place.)

Jayabalard
2009-06-24, 03:41 PM
As I mentioned in another thread recently, the official formulas for CR and ECL work better as rough guidelines than hard-and-fast rules. It would have been nice if they had come out and admitted that and essentially added "Adjust as needed", like they did for magic item pricing.That seems to be rather sad that people think that it's necessary to say that.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-06-24, 04:17 PM
A monster character should be about as useful to a player as a human character of the same ECL. It should have whatever LA gives it the appropriate ECL.

Absolutely. What I mean was that, at least in WotC's monster class model from Savage Species, many abilities are considered "covered" or "bought" by their racial HD. It might actually work out better if LA had to cover them all, and racial HD were considered in some different fashion. (Maybe they could just be exchanged for class levels entirely, at a ratio depending on the monster's type. Why does an ogre fighter need to have crappy giant HD anyway?)

Devils_Advocate
2009-06-24, 08:09 PM
Absolutely. What I mean was that, at least in WotC's monster class model from Savage Species, many abilities are considered "covered" or "bought" by their racial HD.
What do you mean? :smallconfused: I thought that monsters just got savage progressions worked out for them, and some of the levels of those progression gave hit dice, and others didn't. Since, y'know, the monsters have more ECL than HD.


It might actually work out better if LA had to cover them all, and racial HD were considered in some different fashion. (Maybe they could just be exchanged for class levels entirely, at a ratio depending on the monster's type. Why does an ogre fighter need to have crappy giant HD anyway?)
If you made an ogre trade in its 4 racial hit dice for two levels of Fighter, it would essentially be changed from a 4 HD +2 LA monster to a 0 HD +4 LA monster. Which... Just... Why would you want to do that? It makes the ogre even less of the big hulking meaty brute he should be and even more of a glass cannon. A bunch o' RHD is better for an uncomplicated melee brute than a bit of LA. If anything, it would be better to trade in the ogre's +2 LA for 4 more HD. Now we're talkin'!

Similarly, for a skill monkey, losing hit dice is bad, because total HD determines max skill ranks. You want as little of your ECL as possible to be made out of LA, even if that means that it has to be bigger.

Now, for a spellcaster, losing hit dice to get a lower, all-LA racial ECL is a good tradeoff.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-06-24, 09:06 PM
What do you mean? :smallconfused: I thought that monsters just got savage progressions worked out for them, and some of the levels of those progression gave hit dice, and others didn't. Since, y'know, the monsters have more ECL than HD.

What I mean is that monster hit dice aren't just "BAB, saves, hit points, skill poinst" - they're also supposed to include ability bonuses and special abilities and attacks (like in the SS progressions) and the like, which supposedly puts them on the level with class levels (but we know that's not true).


If you made an ogre trade in its 4 racial hit dice for two levels of Fighter, it would essentially be changed from a 4 HD +2 LA monster to a 0 HD +4 LA monster. Which... Just... Why would you want to do that? It makes the ogre even less of the big hulking meaty brute he should be and even more of a glass cannon. A bunch o' RHD is better for an uncomplicated melee brute than a bit of LA. If anything, it would be better to trade in the ogre's +2 LA for 4 more HD. Now we're talkin'!

The idea was that they wouldn't count toward ECL, but yeah, then the ratio exchange wouldn't make any sense. Basically, I think you ought to be able to play monsters without the dratted racial HD, with LA covering their abilities (like it does for races like drow). Go figure how to work that out into a balanced system.

Devils_Advocate
2009-06-24, 10:04 PM
It seems like it would make more sense to do the opposite: To have ECL = HD = CR for everything, with e.g. drow being 2 HD monsters. That would bring a lot of things into whack.

Level Adjustments suck. Hit dice are handy!