Non-associated Class Levels

[RndmNumGen]

So, I understand what non-associated class levels do for NPCs, but I'm not sure how they are supposed to work. In theory, each non-associated level counts towards 1/2 a CR. In practice however, things get... weird.

A Lv10 Fighter, for example, is CR 10. A Lv20 Warrior is also CR 10. The Warrior will whomp the Fighter pretty much every time however, due to having double the BAB, HP, and saves. A Lv10 Fighter will also be fairly each for a Lv 10 party to defeat, while the Lv20 Warrior will be really tough in comparison.

So how are DMs supposed to use these to balance encounters then? There is always going with your gut feeling to determine encounter difficulty, but why does a system like this exist then?

Things get worse when you start adding in non-associated PC classes. As stated, a level in a class that enhances a creature's main way of fighting is +1 CR, while a level in a class that advances something different is +1/2 CR, with the three main categories being Melee(Fighter, Barbarian), Magic(Wizard, Sorcerer), and Stealth(Rogue, Ranger). So a Fighter 10/Wizard 10 is CR15(Not that anybody would actually do that...)

What if they dip a class to gain some ability though? Let's say a Fighter takes a Cloistered Cleric dip to grab some Devotion feats. Cleric would be a non-associated class normally, but the Devotion feats being picked up(plus the Turn attempts to power them) can directly power up the Fighter's abilities. Is it still non-associated? Or what if a Wizard takes a level of Sorcerer? They're both magic classes, but taking a level of one doesn't improve the abilities of the other at all.

Can someone explain how these are supposed to work?

[Eldariel]

So, I understand what non-associated class levels do for NPCs, but I'm not sure how they are supposed to work. In theory, each non-associated level counts towards 1/2 a CR. In practice however, things get... weird.

A Lv10 Fighter, for example, is CR 10. A Lv20 Warrior is also CR 10. The Warrior will whomp the Fighter pretty much every time however, due to having double the BAB, HP, and saves. A Lv10 Fighter will also be fairly each for a Lv 10 party to defeat, while the Lv20 Warrior will be really tough in comparison.

So how are DMs supposed to use these to balance encounters then? There is always going with your gut feeling to determine encounter difficulty, but why does a system like this exist then?

Things get worse when you start adding in non-associated PC classes. As stated, a level in a class that enhances a creature's main way of fighting is +1 CR, while a level in a class that advances something different is +1/2 CR, with the three main categories being Melee(Fighter, Barbarian), Magic(Wizard, Sorcerer), and Stealth(Rogue, Ranger). So a Fighter 10/Wizard 10 is CR15(Not that anybody would actually do that...)

What if they dip a class to gain some ability though? Let's say a Fighter takes a Cloistered Cleric dip to grab some Devotion feats. Cleric would be a non-associated class normally, but the Devotion feats being picked up(plus the Turn attempts to power them) can directly power up the Fighter's abilities. Is it still non-associated? Or what if a Wizard takes a level of Sorcerer? They're both magic classes, but taking a level of one doesn't improve the abilities of the other at all.

Can someone explain how these are supposed to work?

1) CR is a system of Swiss cheese. That is, full of holes, not delicious. Like, it's literally made of holes.

2) What counts as associated is under DM purview. Anything that synergises with the base chassis, though, such as CC dip to gain Devotion feats, should be treated as associated regardless of the letter. These are guidelines for determining CR, not hard rules.

3) The whole purpose of these rules is that e.g. a monstrous caster can have a relevant number of casting levels to pose offense relevant to the PCs. A Frost Giant Wizard 10 isn't going to be a very impressive CR 19 opponent. CR 14 though? Well, it's definitely closer, what with almost level-appropriate magic. This is the purpose of these rules; to make monstrous casters more accurately CRd and to make it possible to throw CR appropriate non-humanoid casters that are actually challenging at the PCs. Funny that they didn't account for these same problems with the class system though.

4) CR X is supposed to be easy for party level X. The party is expected to clear multiple such encounters per day without being really lethally threatened. The fact that Wizards of equal level are more threatening than Fighters is just a feature/flaw of the system.

[JaronK]

A Lv10 Fighter, for example, is CR 10. A Lv20 Warrior is also CR 10. The Warrior will whomp the Fighter pretty much every time however, due to having double the BAB, HP, and saves. A Lv10 Fighter will also be fairly each for a Lv 10 party to defeat, while the Lv20 Warrior will be really tough in comparison.

Depends. Honestly, that extra 6 feats could make the Fighter a much bigger threat. Those two are actually pretty close. The Warrior has double the BAB and such... but if the Fighter has 6 Archery feats (in addition to both having, I dunno, tripping and charging feats) then the Fighter has a very powerful tactical option at range while the Warrior is just okay.

But in general, yes, the CR system is pretty rough.


So how are DMs supposed to use these to balance encounters then? There is always going with your gut feeling to determine encounter difficulty, but why does a system like this exist then?

CR is a rough gauge, which is accurate when you play a certain way (Healbot Cleric, Blaster Wizard, Meatshield Fighter, Skillmonkey Rogue. Enemies have really weak feat choices, and don't play that hard. DM is expected to fudge in favor of the players). If you don't play in exactly the right way, it doesn't work so well, but it's a rough guideline.


Things get worse when you start adding in non-associated PC classes. As stated, a level in a class that enhances a creature's main way of fighting is +1 CR, while a level in a class that advances something different is +1/2 CR, with the three main categories being Melee(Fighter, Barbarian), Magic(Wizard, Sorcerer), and Stealth(Rogue, Ranger). So a Fighter 10/Wizard 10 is CR15(Not that anybody would actually do that...)

Makes more sense than a Fighter 10/Wizard 10 being the same CR as a Wizard 20 though, doesn't it?

But in general, the non associated class concept REALLY doesn't work. This is especially true if you take a high HD low CR melee enemy and pile on the non associated Wizard levels. Awakened 10 Headed Hydra Zombie Wizard 20, for example, is IIRC CR 15, while a regular Wizard 20 is CR 20.

JaronK

[Godskook]

Depends. Honestly, that extra 6 feats could make the Fighter a much bigger threat. Those two are actually pretty close. The Warrior has double the BAB and such... but if the Fighter has 6 Archery feats (in addition to both having, I dunno, tripping and charging feats) then the Fighter has a very powerful tactical option at range while the Warrior is just okay.

Actually, Warrior 20 is only 3 feats behind Fighter 10, but is up 10 BAB, 10 HD(including double Con to HP, higher skill ranks, etc), 3 stat points, and basically double the base saves. You'd be hard pressed after about CR 2 to find a few feats that could make a fighter outperform a Warrior of equal CR. Especially considering that many of the best Fighter feats are available to Warriors first due to BAB restrictions(Warrior gets shock trooper at CR 3!).

(For ease of calculation, Fighters gain 5/6ths of a feat per CR while Warriors gain 4/6ths of a feat per CR. Fighters start with 1 additional feat.)


But in general, the non associated class concept REALLY doesn't work. This is especially true if you take a high HD low CR melee enemy and pile on the non associated Wizard levels. Awakened 10 Headed Hydra Zombie Wizard 20, for example, is IIRC CR 15, while a regular Wizard 20 is CR 20.

10-Headed Hyrads start with CR 9 and 10 HD. 20 non-associated levels give +10 CR(so you're off already), but you can only give it up to 10 levels of wizard before it becomes 'associated', which means that at CR 15, you've only gained up to wizard 10. To get to wizard 20, you'd have to hit CR 25, and at that point, we're dealing with epic stuff anyway, so that sounds about right.

--------------------

@OP, honestly, it entirely depends on what classes you're using with this, and how optimized your party is. For my group, I pretty much have to use Warrior over Fighter for my combat NPCs, cause the durability is practically required to make them relevant without giving them higher tier classes(like ToB or casting).

For less optimized groups, the DM is supposed to use his better judgment.

And remember, as Eldariel said, the CR system is utter garbage.

[Mystral]

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060418a


Creatures with NPC Class Levels: When a creature has levels in one of the NPC classes presented in Chapter 4 in the Dungeon Master's Guide, subtract one from the class level before adding it to the base CR. A creature's CR, however, always increases by at least +1 when it has an NPC class level.

A Level 20 Warrior is CR 19, not 10.

[Keld Denar]

Also, class levels are only non-associated as long as there are equal or less of them than the creature has RHD.

A human doesn't have RHD, and thus never has non-associated class levels. Ever.

An Ogre has 4 HD and is CR 3. An Ogre Barbarian1 has 5 HD and is CR4. An Ogre Cleric4 has 8 HD and is CR 5 (3 + 4/2). An Ogre Cleric5 has 9 HD and is CR 6 (3 + 4/2 + 1).

An Ogre Warrior1/Cleric4 is also CR 5, which is a neat little trick you can do to give an NPC a couple extra HP and sometimes push them over the threshold to pick up an extra feat or ability stat bump.

[RndmNumGen]

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060418a



A Level 20 Warrior is CR 19, not 10.

Huh. I never noticed that before. I was going off of this:


Associated Class Levels

Class levels that increase a monster’s existing strengths are known as associated class levels. Each associated class level a monster has increases its CR by 1.

Barbarian, fighter, paladin, and ranger are associated classes for a creature that relies on its fighting ability.

Rogue and ranger are associated classes for a creature that relies on stealth to surprise its foes, or on skill use to give itself an advantage.

A spellcasting class is an associated class for a creature that already has the ability to cast spells as a character of the class in question, since the monster’s levels in the spellcasting class stack with its innate spellcasting ability.
Nonassociated Class Levels

If you add a class level that doesn’t directly play to a creature’s strength the class level is considered nonassociated, and things get a little more complicated. Adding a nonassociated class level to a monster increases its CR by ½ per level until one of its nonassociated class levels equals its original Hit Dice. At that point, each additional level of the same class or a similar one is considered associated and increases the monster’s CR by 1.

Levels in NPC classes are always treated as nonassociated.

[Gotterdammerung]

He said AWAKENED hydra ZOMBIE. CR5

20 non associated lvls of wizard +10 CR

although this is a bad example because a awaken undead won't give an intelligence higher than whats normal for the creature and hydras have a 2 int.

But his point still stands.

Are there High hit die monsters with low CRs?
Yes... Hell Yes.

Can they abuse non-associated class levels?
Definitely



Everyone keeps looking to the 3.X system and pointing out how dysfunctional it is because it can be abused.

News flash!

Every system can be abused.

This system at least has checks and balances in the form of a all powerful moderator.

And devotes several entire books towards teaching that moderator to be a fair adjudicator.



To the OP:
Non-associated class levels are basically in the DM's arsenal as a tool to catch up a monster who isn't streamlined.

If you plan on doing anything to fix the synergy of a class so that it meshes with the monster better, then you should not use this tool.

It should also be used sparingly.

[Godskook]

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060418a



A Level 20 Warrior is CR 19, not 10.

Incorrect, actually. By RAW, a level 20 warrior is CR 10, not CR 19 or 20.

1.Primary source rules, as outlined in all core errata states that primary source trumps everything and primary source for monsters is the monster manual.

2.The monster manual, on page 294, stats the rule given by the OP. This is in the chapter entitled "Advancing Monsters", which would be the primary source chapter on the topic.

3.The website www.d20srd.org is almost completely without error with regards to RAW, so is a useful way of quickly looking up such things as pertains to core SRD rules such as this. I highly recommend it.

[Runestar]

If you compared a warrior20 with a 20-HD dragon (~cr13-14), the former comes up pretty short. So yeah, cr10 seems about right, even if it is a cr19 on paper. In that same vein, a fighter10 is likely nowhere close to a cr10 either. For the same cr, you get a much stronger fighter in the form of a fire giant or noble salamander.

In summary, all these cr guidelines are just that - guidelines. I can argue that a frost giant wiz15 is a decent cr17 challenge, but some parties may find it way too overwhelming (you are looking at a caster with 300+ hp and very strong defenses overall).

At the end of the day, you will still need to closely monitor your monsters' stats, compare them against your party's stats, and decide if the monster is too strong a challenge or not.

[docnessuno]

Incorrect, actually. By RAW, a level 20 warrior is CR 10, not CR 19 or 20.

1.Primary source rules, as outlined in all core errata states that primary source trumps everything and primary source for monsters is the monster manual.

2.The monster manual, on page 294, stats the rule given by the OP. This is in the chapter entitled "Advancing Monsters", which would be the primary source chapter on the topic.

3.The website www.d20srd.org is almost completely without error with regards to RAW, so is a useful way of quickly looking up such things as pertains to core SRD rules such as this. I highly recommend it.

Incorrect, actually. By RAW, a level 20 warrior is CR 19, not CR 10.
DMG, page 38
Since NPC classes (See chapter 5: Campaigns) are weaker than PC classes, levels in an NPC class contribute less than levels in a PC class. For an NPC with an NPC class, determine her challange rating as if she had a PC class with one less level. for a creature with monster levels in addition to NPC class levles, add the NPC levels -1 to the creature's base CR (always adding at least 1)
Dwarf warrior 10, CR 9
Dwarf fighter 10, CR 10
Ogre (CR 2 base) warrior 10, CR 11
Ogre (CR 2 base) fighter 10, CR 12

[Runestar]

So moral of the story is, don't ever take more than 2 lvs in warrior (or 4 if you are a kobold).

Warrior10 -> cr9
Warrior2/fighter8 -> also cr9. :smalltongue:

[chadmeister]

Wow, all these years and I've never seen the associated class rules.

It appears CR for NPC classes has different rules for PC races and for "monsters". I guess it's a judgement call when which set applies, but when you're looking at 20th level warrior, I'd say the warrior part is far more important to the character than the race, so I'd go with the DMG rules there.

[lunar2]

only some of the class levels are non-associated, up to the same number of RHD the creature has. note that while most 1HD creatures (like humans) give up their RHD when they gain a class level, they still count as 1HD creatures, and so you subtract 1 from the CR if they have non-associated class levels.

however, we all know the CR system is broken. It's been broken ever since Core was released. for example, did you know that a Greater Barghest is a CR 5, but is more powerful than most CR 7 monsters? and they didn't even advance it properly from the Barghest. A properly advanced Greater Barghest would actually be CR 8, comparing it to the other monsters in the MM.

[Eldariel]

Huh. I never noticed that before. I was going off of this:

See, the thing here is, you can only gain non-associated class levels at the cheaper rate equal to your racial HD. So while they're non-associated, once they exceed your level in the monster class that means little. Human has 1 HD that's subsumed by the first level so the levels in Warrior basically only have the 1 point NPC class reduction to CR (obviously not accurate; Fighter 16 is more than likely to trump Warrior 19 but meh).

[Godskook]

Incorrect, actually. By RAW, a level 20 warrior is CR 19, not CR 10.

If you're going to correct me, its kinda required to address my point. Otherwise, it looks like you don't know what you're talking about.

Specifically, how are you getting around primary source rules?

[Doug Lampert]

Incorrect, actually. By RAW, a level 20 warrior is CR 10, not CR 19 or 20.

1.Primary source rules, as outlined in all core errata states that primary source trumps everything and primary source for monsters is the monster manual.

2.The monster manual, on page 294, stats the rule given by the OP. This is in the chapter entitled "Advancing Monsters", which would be the primary source chapter on the topic.

3.The website www.d20srd.org is almost completely without error with regards to RAW, so is a useful way of quickly looking up such things as pertains to core SRD rules such as this. I highly recommend it.

Quoting the rule you CLAIM to be using:

"If you add a class level that doesn’t directly play to a creature’s strength the class level is considered nonassociated, and things get a little more complicated. Adding a nonassociated class level to a monster increases its CR by ½ per level until one of its nonassociated class levels equals its original Hit Dice. At that point, each additional level of the same class or a similar one is considered associated and increases the monster’s CR by 1."

The original HD of a warrior 20 is 1. The other 19 HD are advanced. The classes are treated as associated after his first 2 (1 that he started with which counted 1/2 and 1 added HD), after that all HD are associated BY THE RULE YOU CLAIM TO BE USING!

This gives a CR of 19 for a warrior 20, which the SPECIFIC rule in the DMG also gives, and specific trumps general. Both rules agree IN FULL, and both give a CR of 19.

[Keld Denar]

Its kinda debatable whether creatures with 1 HD (which gets swapped for a class level) count that level.

I mean, a human fighter10 is CR10, and an orc wizard10 is CR10, and a goblin druid10 is CR10 (by the book). If that were true, they would be +.5 CR for the first level, and a human fighter10 would be CR9.5 (however that rounds, probably up). No, I think that the RHD that gets traded away for 1 HD humanoid creatures for a class level doesn't actually count for determining non-associated class levels.

[Tyndmyr]

If your entire class build is CLASSNAME x, how you possibly argue that some of those levels are not associated?

CR ain't perfect, but this smells of intentionally trying to break it.

It's also remarkably hard to find a situation in which fighter is an associated class level, and warrior is not. They're both the same kind of class. If one is, the other one should be.



No, non-associated levels are what you use when you decide to make your dire bear cast as a sorcerer, because there's a pretty complete lack of synergy between these things.

[JaronK]

Whoops, forgot about the Int of a Hydra. But yeah, in general any high HD low CR melee creature with caster levels on it that match the HD of the critter is going to be insanely powerful for its CR. How about a nice Stone Giant Wizard 14 (assume he boosted his Int a bit)? He's rocking out with his CR 15, just one higher than a Gnome Wizard 14. A bit silly, really. An Ettin Sorcerer 10 is likewise only CR 11, while a Huge Air Elemental Cleric 16 is only CR 15. A Slaughter Wight Sorcerer 18 is only CR 17 despite being an absolutely brutal gish. A Forsaken Shell Wizard 14 is CR 13 (and is freaking spooky). And an Entomber Cleric 8 is CR 9, making it terrifying in melee (Str 23!) and a great necromancer BBEG concept, though it would need the appropriate feat to cast spells with verbal components. You get the idea.

And Non associated levels only apply to creatures that have something to not associate with. So a Human Warrior 20 is CR 19 (DMG rules, because non associated levels don't apply to humans)... but a Troll Warrior 20 is CR 15, because a normal troll is CR 5 and the Warrior levels are not associated. Obviously, this is a solid example of how the non associated class levels rules really don't work well.

Obviously, the primary source for NPC classes is the DMG, though the primary source for association of class levels is the Monster Manual. Both can trump depending on the situation.

JaronK

[lunar2]

If your entire class build is CLASSNAME x, how you possibly argue that some of those levels are not associated?

CR ain't perfect, but this smells of intentionally trying to break it.

It's also remarkably hard to find a situation in which fighter is an associated class level, and warrior is not. They're both the same kind of class. If one is, the other one should be.



No, non-associated levels are what you use when you decide to make your dire bear cast as a sorcerer, because there's a pretty complete lack of synergy between these things.

warrior is always nonassociated, no matter what you put it on, because it's an NPC class. although a fighter and warrior are the same style of class, the fighter is much more powerful.

@Keld Denar actually, an Orc Wizard 10 should be Cr 9 by raw, because an Orc's -2 Int hurts it as a wizard. the class does not play to the race's strengths, even if the class itself is overpowered.

a human fighter, on the other hand, is CR 10, because all PC classes play to the strengths of a human.

[JaronK]

Warrior is non associated when the association rules apply. At other times (when using PHB races and similar) you follow the DMG's rules, which says their CR is level - 1. The Monster Manual cannot possibly trump for a Human Warrior, which is in no way related to anything in the Monster Manual.

JaronK

[lunar2]

well, since the association rules give the same result as the dmg rules, what's all the fuss about? A 1 HD creature, unless specified otherwise, loses its RHD when it gains a class level, and is CR 1 for an associated PC class, or CR 1/2 for any non-associated class, as well as any NPC class.

[JaronK]

DMG says a Human Warrior 10 is CR 9. Monster Manual doesn't say anything about humans, but it does say NPC classes are non associated, which would imply CR 5. That's the difference.

JaronK

[lunar2]

non-associated increases in 1/2 cr increments until class levels = RHD. humans have 1 RHD until they gain a class level, which replaces that RHD.

so

warrior 1 = cr 1/2 (base 0, increase 1/2)
warrior 2 = cr 1 (base 1/2, increase 1. technically CR 1 1/2, but fractions always round down)
warrior 3 = cr 2 (as above)
....
warrior 10 = cr 9

a single RHD creature, unless specified otherwise, has a CR = class level for associated class levels, and CR = class level -1 for non-associated class levels.

[JaronK]

...oh god, why did I not see that?

Well said, Lunar.

JaronK

[Keld Denar]

What's an associated class for a human? An elf? A dwarf? An orc?

The only non-associated levels for races without RHD would be NPC classes since they really aren't that predisposed toward anything with just racial abilities.

[JaronK]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure all the 1HD races would count all PC classes as Associated and NPC classes as non associated. You could decide that an Orc Wizard is -1 CR for being non associated, but that seems like a poor idea... though a Halfing Barbarian with -1 CR might be a touch more appropriate (but only a touch).

JaronK

[Mystral]

If you would make Orcs Wizards LA -1, the world would be under the iron fistes rules of the dread orc hexers in a few years.

No, I'm not confusing LA with CR, just saying.

[Runestar]

If you're going to correct me, its kinda required to address my point. Otherwise, it looks like you don't know what you're talking about.

Specifically, how are you getting around primary source rules?

I think it also helps his cause that just about every other dnd splatbook follows his rule. In elder evils, a warrior9 npc is cr8. In red hand of doom, the hobgoblin veterans (warrior4) are cr3s. If anyone can remember the stats of warrior npcs in other books, please contribute, but I daresay their cr would all follow the cr = class lv-1 guideline.

I would argue that their cr should be much lower, but as far as the rules are concerned, docnessuno is dead on. :smallsmile:

[Hand_of_Vecna]

Here's a few basic notes I have regarding the Non associated system.

1. The system has a built in rule that only works up to the monster's HD it should really be up to the Monster's original CR. After that your really a class X getting to be a monstrous race for cheap.

2. Think about what non associated really means and use it sparingly. I think the best possible use is for scouts for non stealthy races since they may have to compensate for size penalties, dex penalties and not being able to take stealth skills with monstrous HD.

3. Cleric and Druid are never non associated for anything. ever. Well, ok maybe for monsters that function as arcane or psionic casters. No, nort even then it will just tempt you to houserule a theurge PrC and try to call that non associated so no, never.

[RndmNumGen]

Alright, so let me make sure I have this straight... you can only have non-associated class levels if you have RHD. If you don't have RHD, all class levels are associated. So a Wizard 6, Fighter 3/Wizard 3, and Warrior 7 are all CR6?

That seems like NPCs will always be weaker than monsters for their CR... but at least it makes more sense than a Lv20 Warrior and a Lv10 Fighter being the same CR.

[JaronK]

Alright, so let me make sure I have this straight... you can only have non-associated class levels if you have RHD.

Functionally yes, technically no. The thing is, non associated levels give 1/2 CR per level up to the number of racial HD you have. After that, they give +1 CR per level, just like associated levels. So it doesn't matter if your levels are associated or not if you don't have racial HD.


If you don't have RHD, all class levels are associated. So a Wizard 6, Fighter 3/Wizard 3, and Warrior 7 are all CR6?

Yes, which would be fine if classes were better balanced. However... not so much.


That seems like NPCs will always be weaker than monsters for their CR... but at least it makes more sense than a Lv20 Warrior and a Lv10 Fighter being the same CR.

Generally, yes, NPCs are usually weaker unless you play them as smart casters with decent feats, in which case they're far too powerful. After all, a Cleric 10 could have Corpse Crafter and a pair of 10 Headed Zombie Hydras with him, with 210 hitpoints each, 1d4 fast healing per round (Black Sand), and +4 Str and Dex. And that's still a CR 10 encounter. Bit stronger than a Level 11 Human Warrior, isn't it?

The big weakness for NPC types is that they don't get anywhere near full WBL, which makes them much weaker.

JaronK