Giving more XP for environmental hazards - I searched, and I question the result.

[NOhara24]

Hello Playground,

I searched the forum before I posted this thread and found that the rule of thumb for environmental hazards in an encounter is as follows:

+1 CR if the environment favors the NPCs
+2 CR if the environment heavily favors the NPCs

And then of course the other way around. But my question is this, if the environmental hazards are, well, hazards to both NPC and PC alike, is it really just a wash? I also read that some like to count environmental hazards as traps and add their CR to the encounter as well. What does the playground think?

[theasl]

Disclaimer: I have never DM'd before.

To your first question, it's probably better to think of it in relative terms: +1 if the terrain favors the NPCs more than the PCs, +2 if the terrain favors the NPCs a lot more than the PCs, etc., so it wouldn't be necessary to determine both and then add together for the final adjustment. If the terrain favors neither, then there would be no adjustment, unless you wanted to consider dealing with the environment itself as part of the encounter (hence the "counting as traps" thing). I'd personally only do that if the environment was capable of causing extreme harm or death to the PCs, not just a minor inconvenience.

[NOhara24]

...unless you wanted to consider dealing with the environment itself as part of the encounter (hence the "counting as traps" thing). I'd personally only do that if the environment was capable of causing extreme harm or death to the PCs, not just a minor inconvenience.

Lava damage is a hell of a thing. Now, to figure out the CR of a 1sq x 1sq pit of molten rock.

[Jack_Simth]

Hello Playground,

I searched the forum before I posted this thread and found that the rule of thumb for environmental hazards in an encounter is as follows:

+1 CR if the environment favors the NPCs
+2 CR if the environment heavily favors the NPCs

And then of course the other way around. But my question is this, if the environmental hazards are, well, hazards to both NPC and PC alike, is it really just a wash? I also read that some like to count environmental hazards as traps and add their CR to the encounter as well. What does the playground think?
If they are essentially the same hazard to both, then yes. But consider:

A "standard" mid-level party (normal humanoid Wizard/Rogue/Cleric/Fighter) with the usual weaponry mostly unexpectedly find themselves underwater (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/wilderness.htm#underwaterCombat). The cleric happened to have a single copy of Water Breathing, and so nobody's drowning at the moment. However, they're not equipped with Freedom of movement or other effects that they'd normally prepare if they knew what was going to happen (the rogue has a light crossbow and two shortswords; the Cleric has a mace, the Wizard prepared mostly fire spells, and the Fighter has a Greatsword and a backup longbow). While underwater with no clear retreat path, they get attacked by classed Merfolk (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/merfolk.htm), one of which is a caster with Dispel Magic.

Is that scenario worth +1 or +2 to the CR? I'd say yes, it "favors the NPCs". For the NPCs, it's normal. For the PC's, they're at a bunch of minuses to their stuff, and are subject to getting hit by an effect that WILL kill them, just not right now.

Turn it around:
A delegation of merfolk visiting an inland kingdom well away from water; for one reason or another, the merfolk get sorely offended at the PC's, and attack. The Merfolk are pretty restricted on their movement (5 foot land speed!), but the PCs are fine.

Is that scenario worth -1 or -2 to the CR? I'd say yes, it "favors the PC's". For the NPCs, they pretty much can't get away - they don't come with much in the way of ranged effects, and they've got very low mobility. For the PC's, it's normal.

Meet in the middle:
Same party as before is unexpectedly deep underwater... locked in combat with their "evil twins" this time, who are equally unprepared for an aquatic adventure. Yes, the PC's are at a bunch of minuses, and are a bit more easily killed... but then, their "evil twins" are soaking the exact same penalties. It's a wash. Shouldn't affect XP too badly.

[OldTrees1]

Either the enemy or the hazard is the threat to the Party.

When it is the enemy, only how much more the environment favors them over the PCs will add to the encounter difficulty. If everyone is at half health then it is a wash(the threat was reduced by an equivalent amount to the decrease in your ability to handle it). Hazards tend to have less of an impact than traps and be more equal opportunity than traps. However I would rule that extremely one-sided benefit from a hazard should increase the encounter difficulty as if it where a trap.

When the hazard is the actual threat to the Party, then flip the script. The hazard has a CR and the difficulty of the encounter increases based upon the enemy interference.



So yes to both. The room being lined with thorns is an equal opportunity hazard and thus would not increase the encounter difficulty of the orc charge (although it would make it shorter). Replace the thorns with lava and the lava lake becomes the encounter that gets modified slightly by the biased orc charge hazard.