PDA

View Full Version : Level Adjustment and Challenge Rating (3.5)



Goonthegoof
2010-08-23, 01:10 AM
I've been looking at what the DMG says about both and to me they don't quite seem to work. Level adjustment is supposed to balance things like templates to make sure a creature with a template is equal in power to a creature without a template- ie with a level adjustment of 8, a level 5 (human) vampire fighter is supposed to be equal in power to a level 13 human fighter.

This however doesn't stack up properly. According to the DMG a class level increases the CR of a creature by 1. But working by CR, a level 5 (human) vampire fighter is of equal strength to a level 7 human fighter. So why aren't CR and LA the same thing?

Gralamin
2010-08-23, 01:29 AM
I've been looking at what the DMG says about both and to me they don't quite seem to work. Level adjustment is supposed to balance things like templates to make sure a creature with a template is equal in power to a creature without a template- ie with a level adjustment of 8, a level 5 (human) vampire fighter is supposed to be equal in power to a level 13 human fighter.

This however doesn't stack up properly. According to the DMG a class level increases the CR of a creature by 1. But working by CR, a level 5 (human) vampire fighter is of equal strength to a level 7 human fighter. So why aren't CR and LA the same thing?

The "justification" is that the abilities granted become too useful over time, with CR mentioning the abilities in a single encounter. This system doesn't make any sense though, and plain doesn't work (Either CR or LA).

WinWin
2010-08-23, 01:37 AM
Because the features of the template that make it a challence are not equal to the features in the hands of a PC.

eg. The vampire is hard to kill. Fast healing coupled with an ability that prevents destruction. Add in at will features that allow for charming, summoning and spawning new allies and you have an effective boss monster. That does not neccesarily make an effective player character. The fact that a vampre has a lair, dietary requirement and limited activity cycle means it is inappropiate/disruptive for players. Additionally, the abilities granted by the template do not balance compared to the features of an existing class or race.

CR relates to the challenge posed by a monster. Unfortunately, CR can be inappropriate at times. Some monsters (eg. Ogre Magi) are over CR'ed. Others are under CR'ed (Allip). Others do not take environmental factors into consideration (Dragon in a cave vs. Dragon flying over a desert). At best CR can be described as a rule of thumb.

LA relates to how powerful a certain race is. Sometimes it is an accurate estimate, other times it is not. Generally, the more non-human a race is, or the more special abilities it has, the higher the LA, even if the race/template is not that powerful. Sometimes this can be heavy-handed (illithid), other times this can be rather soft (Greenscale Naga).

The short of it is that CR and LA are best regarded as abstracts. They do not stand up to detailed scrutiny. I hope that helps...If I confused the issue more I apologise.

Devils_Advocate
2010-08-23, 06:58 PM
Page 6 of Savage Species talks about how Challenge Rating and Effective Character Level supposedly measure different things. One basis for the disparity seems to be the bizarre standard assumption that the PCs and only the PCs are fighting their recommended intake of 4 challenging but not overwhelming (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SortingAlgorithmOfEvil) combat encounters per day (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EverythingTryingToKillYou) (on average).

It also says that flexibility matters more to a PC, which doesn't really even make sense. A Balor may only use three or four of its spell-like abilities in an encounter, but it gets to select the ones that seem like they will be most effective, based on what it knows about its foes. How is it any more limited by the action economy or any more advantaged by flexibility than a PC?

Gear is an important consideration. PCs normally get PC WBL appropriate to their ECLs. NPCs, on the other hand... well. The rules are conflicted on the issue. Page 51 of the DMG says to give them NPC WBL based on only their class levels in addition to treasure according to their monster entries. This is consistent with the DMG's instructions on generating NPCs.

On the other hand, some of the Monster Manual entries for monsters with class levels, like the Mind Flayer Sorcerer and the Ogre Barbarian, say that their gear is included in their normal treasure. And page 291 of the MM says that you should use NPC WBL appropriate to a monster's ECL, of all things, if you choose to equip it with gear! Which would make sense if it also said to set the monster's CR equal to its ECL in this case, but it doesn't.

Anyway, high-CR monsters often have high ability scores, armor classes, etc. built in, while a high-level PC is instead expected to raise these stats using magic items purchased with the wealth of a small kingdom. Obviously, getting lots of great big bonuses from your race and your equipment is more powerful than just one or the other, so it's a factor to consider with regard to balance.

Fizban
2010-08-23, 07:59 PM
The "justification" is that the abilities granted become too useful over time, with CR mentioning the abilities in a single encounter. This system doesn't make any sense though, and plain doesn't work (Either CR or LA).

The others elaborate, but this is pretty much it. Especially with fast healing or any at-will spell like ability. The game also thinks that breath weapons are ridiculously awesome, even if they only deal 1 die of damage (I'm looking at you, Mephlings).

Basically, you should never take the listed level adjustment as more than a suggestion when you're DMing. While the given numbers are useful in online discussions, most of them don't actually work (either too good or too bad), so if you have the option you should change them whenever approrpiate. Use the monster's hit dice, challenge rating, and the given adjustment together.

If the monster has more level adjustment than it has hit dice, the designer probably didn't understand how the system works, and thought that LA included hit dice, so go ahead and subtract the hit dice from the given number to get the actual LA you'll start off with.

A monster's adjusted level should never be more than a couple points higher than it's challenge rating, otherwise they won't survive combat. Non adjusted PCs have CR equal to their level, so it should be obvious that when the level adjustment is higher than the CR adjustment, something could get fishy. A good rule is probably no more than +2 LA, otherwise they just won't be good enough. If the monster has more hit dice than it's challenge rating it probably doesn't need very much LA, if it's even still appropriate for a player.

Natural hit dice are much better than LA, but still suck. If a monster has several natural hit dice, it's likely that those are enough to pay for it's abilities with any any more adjustment, because the character will still be functioning at a lower class level than anyone else. Melee characters can fudge through this because a lot of their feats rely on BAB, which you get from racial HD, and ToB also helps, but everyone else is screwed.

Most importantly for your comparison though: the monster advancement system is broken. It is, absolutely and completely, nothing more than a suggestion for gauging how well the players might do against the monster. CR is never meant to be used mechanically and is only a tool for the DM (truenaming aside, blech). Just look at it: players get 1 hit die per level, monsters get multiple hit dice per challenge rating. And then, since they seem to think monster hit dice are somehow better, if the monster takes levels in an "unassociated class", they get even more hit dice. You can take any bruiser monster, add an equal number of wizard levels, and only increase the CR by a few points even though you just doubled it hit dice and added full wizard casting. If you try to use the monster advancement guidelines as rules you have a very good chance of killing your party. If you try to optimize monsters using the advancement guidelines, you will kill your party, and they will die horrible excruciating deaths without a scrap of dignity.

So, why are level adjustment and challenge rating not compatible? Because they're both extremely bad solutions to completely different questions.

Jack_Simth
2010-08-23, 08:48 PM
So, why are level adjustment and challenge rating not compatible? Because they're both extremely bad solutions to completely different questions.
Yes, both are far from perfect... but challenge rating (or something like challenge rating) is needful. Likewise, Level adjustment (or something like level adjustment) is also needful.

The half-dragon human Fighter-1 is not the equal of the human Fighter-1 (by a fair amount). So some kind of balancing is needful ... if you're going to permit half-dragons at all, anyway. Earlier editions of D&D did this kind of thing with variable XP tables (increasing the costs to level). 3.5 does this with Level Adjustment. Sure, LA doesn't adapt for circumstances. Sure, it doesn't take into account level (which is actually a big factor - the +1 LA of the Draconic template is often worth it for a player considering a Draconic Fighter-15 vs. a Fighter-16, but almost never worth it for a player considering a Draconic Fighter-1 vs. a Fighter-2). Is LA as listed a good solution? Not generally - most of the listed LA's are misjudged, one way or the other. Is LA (or something like it) needful? Yes.

Ditto for CR - there needs to be some kind of guideline for inexperienced DM's. Many of them are misjudged, and considering terrain can get very problematic, but CR (or something like CR) is very much needful.

Endarire
2010-08-23, 09:45 PM
A CR9 creature fighting a moderately optimized level 9 character is meant to be a toss-up.

In reality, what makes a creature 'worth' its CR - namely, what role(s) it fills- is so diverse that CR is meant as a suggestion, not an ultimatum.

When I DM, I use creatures and situations I find appropriate thematically and let the players deal. Rarely do they have to struggle to get by. I also award experience by mission, not by "encounter," which allows for a saner progression and smarter play.