Pathfinder CR confusion

[Harpazo]

Hey Giant in the Playground, I have a question in regards to designing encounters as a DM.

I understand finding the APL and determining what difficulty of encounter to make. I understand how to have an XP economy and adding traps/monsters/roleplaying encounters to add up to that XP economy for the desired CR rating for an encounter and then having multiple encounters throughout a single session. But this chart is throwing me and literally nothing I've found has helped me to understand it because it seems like no DM uses it.

Table: CR Equivalencies
Number of Creatures Equal to…
1 Creature CR
2 Creatures CR +2
3 Creatures CR +3
4 Creatures CR +4
6 Creatures CR +5
8 Creatures CR +6
12 Creatures CR +7
16 Creatures CR +8

According to this chart the CR rating goes up dramatically for every additional enemy in the fight. That means that a Ghoul (CR 1) by itself is only a CR 1. While three skeletons (CR 1/3) in a single encounter would equal a CR 4 from the three skeletons adding up to a CR 1 plus the modifier of having 3 creatures to bring it up by a full 3 CR points. So that means a Ghoul is a normal, average encounter for four level 1 PCs and three skeletons is an Epic encounter for four level 1 PCs. From my experience with level 1 PCs fighting Ghouls and skeletons, this just doesn't add up.

That also means that if a level 1 PC fought three Skeletons they would be half way to level 2. I just don't see that as being reasonable. I wouldn't be able to make interesting encounters for my party members because if I gave them, say, three groups of three skeletons in the entire game, they'd each gain 1,500 xp each.

Which is especially confusing because when I read guides and other experiences that DMs have had in designing encounters, they just start with determining how much xp they want to give out, how many Average, Hard, Challenging, and Epic encounters they want, and then divy up the xp according to the CR ratings of the monsters/traps they want to put in without taking into account the whole table about multiple monsters increasing the CR rating and therefore the xp rating. I understand that multiple monsters does increase the difficulty to level, but it's way the crap out of balance.

Just consider, that if DMs design campaigns according to this then fighting 16 bats in a single room is a CR rating of 10 (16 bats x 1/8 CR +8 for 16 creatures = CR 10). So if a single PC goes into a room by himself or herself, finds a room full of bats, and just decides to go hack crazy, he or she is going to get enough experience for level 4. Even if that's spread through the whole party that's still enough to get everyone to level 2, almost to level 3.

Is this right? Am I just being stingy with awarding xp? Am I missunderstanding that table that people rarely ever seem to use? Should I throw it out myself and disregard awarding xp, or at least -that- much xp, for having more than one enemy/trap in a single encounter? It seems like it would be a LOT more fun if I could spread my xp economy out over getting more monsters and higher level monsters than chunking so much of it away just because I put multiple monsters in a single room.

What do you guys think?

[Yomega]

So short answer you are misunderstanding how that table works.

Long answer is a little harder but Ill try my best:
The CR table you are using is for multiple similar monsters take your 3 skeletons:

CR 1/3 to the best of my knowledge I would have 3 of them be CR 1 (get out of fractions before you use that table)

Now lets have 5 of them, so the first 3 would raise it to CR 1 then 2 more would make it a CR 3 encounter, while this may seem overly generous bear in mind at low levels the scope of what the pcs can do is very limited

Now lets move it up a few levels a party of 5 lvl 9 adventurers fights 6 CR 10 monsters and one CR 12: I would award them EXP for 1 CR 12 monster and another CR 15 (the group of CR 10s)

Anyways food is burning I hope this clarified and if anyone knows this better Im happy to have you correct me

[Harpazo]

The two things I was thinking for it is that it only counts whole CR ratings worth of monsters, so that three CR 1/3 monsters would only count as one CR 1 for the purposes of the table. So six skeletons would be CR 6/3 or a CR 2, plus 2 CR for being a multiple encounter. So it all adds up to six skeletons being a CR 4 encounter. That makes way more sense to me.

Or that you only use that table when a Monster's CR adds up to the PCs level. So two CR 4 monsters together against four level 4 PCs would be a CR of 6 against them. But I don't think that makes sense for this table. I'm seriously considering just tossing the table out or only applying it to CR groupings of monsters that add up to whole numbers and only those that add up to the level of the PCs or within shooting distance of the PC levels.

[Urpriest]

The two things I was thinking for it is that it only counts whole CR ratings worth of monsters, so that three CR 1/3 monsters would only count as one CR 1 for the purposes of the table. So six skeletons would be CR 6/3 or a CR 2, plus 2 CR for being a multiple encounter. So it all adds up to six skeletons being a CR 4 encounter. That makes way more sense to me.

Or that you only use that table when a Monster's CR adds up to the PCs level. So two CR 4 monsters together against four level 4 PCs would be a CR of 6 against them. But I don't think that makes sense for this table. I'm seriously considering just tossing the table out or only applying it to CR groupings of monsters that add up to whole numbers and only those that add up to the level of the PCs or within shooting distance of the PC levels.

No, you're still missing the point. You don't add up the CRs, this is instead of adding up the CRs.

[Rhynn]

Now lets have 5 of them, so the first 3 would raise it to CR 1 then 2 more would make it a CR 3 encounter, while this may seem overly generous bear in mind at low levels the scope of what the pcs can do is very limited

I think it would be quite reasonable to keep getting out of the fractions even when adding more skeletons... so 3 skeletons is treated like one CR 1 monster, sort of. 6 skeletons is like 2 CR 1 monsters, totalling CR 3 (1+2). 48 (16x3) skeletons would be CR 9 (1+8), which seems fair-ish (a lot of individually weak creatures is always a bit of a weak encounter, and in this case, a 9th-level cleric would make it trivial).

Anyway, that's just interpretation on my part, over and beyond Urpriest's and Yomega's explanation of how to use that table.


That also means that if a level 1 PC fought three Skeletons they would be half way to level 2. I just don't see that as being reasonable. I wouldn't be able to make interesting encounters for my party members because if I gave them, say, three groups of three skeletons in the entire game, they'd each gain 1,500 xp each.

Huh? A CR 1/3 medium skeleton is worth 135 XP in PF. Three of those is a total of 405 XP.

XP is awarded per monster, not for the total encounter CR.


16 bats in a single room is a CR rating of 10 (16 bats x 1/8 CR +8 for 16 creatures = CR 10).

Nope.

If 1 bat is CR 1/8, 8 bats is CR 1. I think this illustrates well why you need to get out of the fractions all the time, actually. If you just went with the table now, you'd come to CR 7 for the encounter (CR 1+6 for 8 creatures; close enough to 9, for those extra 8 bats). It's obviously more reasonable, and probably the intent, to combine the other 8 bats into a single CR 1 creature for this math. So that's 2 "creatures" (bunches of 8 bats, adding up to CR 1), for a total encounter CR of 3. Not too bad, 16 bats can make a whole lot of attacks, and CR 3 is tough but fine for a 1st-level party.

Those bats would be worth a total of 800 XP (50x16).

[TuggyNE]

So short answer you are misunderstanding how that table works.

Long answer is a little harder but Ill try my best:
The CR table you are using is for multiple similar monsters take your 3 skeletons:

CR 1/3 to the best of my knowledge I would have 3 of them be CR 1 (get out of fractions before you use that table)

Now lets have 5 of them, so the first 3 would raise it to CR 1 then 2 more would make it a CR 3 encounter, while this may seem overly generous bear in mind at low levels the scope of what the pcs can do is very limited

That is not strictly correct; the first three raises it to CR 1, yes, but to get an effective two CR 1 creatures requires another three skeletons, meaning that it's six skeletons at CR 3. Five skeletons would be a touch easier than that, and would be a bit less than CR 3.


Now lets move it up a few levels a party of 5 lvl 9 adventurers fights 6 CR 10 monsters and one CR 12: I would award them EXP for 1 CR 12 monster and another CR 15 (the group of CR 10s)

Well, actually, you could fiddle around with the table, splitting the CR 10s into three groups of two each, making a total of four CR 12 equivalents, and the result is CR 16. (5 level 9 adventurers would likely be slaughtered.)


The two things I was thinking for it is that it only counts whole CR ratings worth of monsters, so that three CR 1/3 monsters would only count as one CR 1 for the purposes of the table. So six skeletons would be CR 6/3 or a CR 2, plus 2 CR for being a multiple encounter. So it all adds up to six skeletons being a CR 4 encounter. That makes way more sense to me.

You only add fractions until you get up to 1. After that you combine chunks as though they were single creatures; a CR 1 chunk, whether it be a single CR 1 creature, or 3 CR 1/3 creatures, is treated the same way for encounter planning.

A crucial thing to remember here is that CR, and levels, are a logarithmic scale: +2 CR actually means "twice as hard", and therefore, a CR 9 encounter is (supposed to be) sixteen times as hard as a CR 1 encounter; four +2s mean 2x2x2x2 = 16.


Or that you only use that table when a Monster's CR adds up to the PCs level. So two CR 4 monsters together against four level 4 PCs would be a CR of 6 against them.

Two CR 4 monsters would be a CR 6, yes, although it has nothing to do with the relative level of the party in this case.

Rhynn's note on bats is correct in methodology and result.

[Yomega]

Throwing out the table might not be a bad idea, the table is at best a guideline but you will (after a little while) know better than any table what your players can handle as a appropriate challenge.

As for XP again that is something for you as a DM to decide just how fast your group progresses the CR system has always been a little awkward largely due to the varied nature of the game we play :smallwink:

Also my note about party level had to do with no matter how many CR 1/8 bats you send at a higher level party it will never be a threat, and as such, should not be worth exp. I know this wassnt clear before I hope this clarifies.

[Harpazo]

Thanks everyone, that was a very helpful lot of posts :)