Level adjustment and CR

[TakeV]

How does level adjustment corrospond with challange rating? I'd like to say that each +1 of LA means a +1 of CR, but then I saw that some monsters and templates have different values for each. For instance, the ghost template increases the CR by 2, but it has a +5 level adjustment.
Rather annoying when trying to balance encounters. :P

[jcsw]

LA has nothing to do with setting a proper challenge for your players.

LA is for players who want to play monsters.

If you want to apply a template to a monster in an encounter, add the CR modifier to the CR of the base monster, the LA on templates is for players who want to gain templates.

[TakeV]

Ah. But does it change the CR if I want to give the monster class levels?

[TakeV]

Ah. But does it change the CR if I want to give the monster class levels?

[Shishnarfne]

Ah. But does it change the CR if I want to give the monster class levels?

CR advances as you give a monster class levels (the level adjustment of the monster does not apply to this calculation). CR is increased by 1 for every "associated" class level and by 1/2 for every "non-associated" class level (once non-associated class levels equal other hit dice, they are treated as associated from that point forward).

Associated is really a judgement call based on whether the class levels help the monster do what "it appears to be designed to do," so, for instance, Fighter/Barbarian levels are associated for trolls (they boost melee combat), while they are not associated for mind flayers. (At least in my games...)

Edit: These are the rules, IIRC for PC classes. NPC classes boost CR by one less.

[Laurellien]

HD and LA are used when determining a monster's effective character level. This is for players who wish to play them. e.g. a monster listed with four hitdice and an LA of +2 would be equivalent to a 6th level character.

For determining EL, just use the CR of the monsters/traps involved.

As far as adding class levels goes, the Monster's CR increases by 1 for every class level that you add, and then decreases by 1 if the monster has any levels in any NPC class (Aristocrat, Commoner, Warrior, Expert, Adept etc...)

[Tsotha-lanti]

How does level adjustment corrospond with challange rating?

It doesn't, in any way, shape, or form. Abilities have totally different "value" for PCs and for NPCs/monsters.

It is never ever used for anything except PCs. (Unless you count it toward an NPC's WBL, in which case you add it to HD. I forget if that's how WotC does it.)

Giving a monster class levels is a different thing entirely. See here (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/improvingMonsters.html), for instance.

[monty]

As far as I know, all templates list their CR adjustment (keep in mind this isn't always accurate, though). This has little to do with the LA, if it has one. CR adjustment is how much better it is for a NPC, while LA is how much better it is for a player. LA is nearly always higher, the idea being that an NPC will usually be encountered once, while a PC can use the template's abilities all the time every day.

[JaxGaret]

Here's a good archived article (http://forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-830551.html) on this subject.

[Tsotha-lanti]

Ghosts are actually a good example. A ghost is a so-so enemy; mostly it's just hard to hit (50% miss chance due to being incorporeal), and has a couple of spiffy special attacks. But as a PC? LA +5 doesn't even begin to cover how incredibly broken they are. Ethereal, incorporeal, perfect maneuverability flight, etc.?

(Well, actually, LA +5 is so crippling no one would or should ever play a ghost, but a ghost PC would still be overpowered in certain specific ways.)

Vampires are a similar, and an even more extreme case.

Good monsters/NPCs are often broken PCs.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

Edit: These are the rules, IIRC for PC classes. NPC classes boost CR by one less.
No. NPC classes are simply always non-associated.


As far as adding class levels goes, the Monster's CR increases by 1 for every class level that you add, and then decreases by 1 if the monster has any levels in any NPC class (Aristocrat, Commoner, Warrior, Expert, Adept etc...)
Only correct if the race has no racial hit dice. Otherwise, the Associated/Non-associated class level rules apply.

[Tsotha-lanti]

No. NPC classes are simply always non-associated.

It's actually two ways. You're right when it comes to adding class levels to monsters/creatures: NPC classes are nonassociated. (Although it's slightly unclear to me if they continue to be nonassociated once the NPC class levels exceed racial HD.) If a creature only has HD from class levels, and has 1 or more NPC class levels, it's CR is equal to level -1.

So yeah, Laurellien and Shishnarfne are incorrect about adding levels to creatures, but would have been correct if they'd been talking about creating NPCs (with no racial HD).

Edit: Although personally I have houseruled that NPCs with only NPC classes have a CR of level/2, on occasion. It is not unproblematic, but it works out nicely enough. An 18th-level warrior is way closer to CR 9 than CR 17.

[bosssmiley]

It's actually two ways. You're right when it comes to adding class levels to monsters/creatures: NPC classes are nonassociated. (Although it's slightly unclear to me if they continue to be nonassociated once the NPC class levels exceed racial HD.)

That one's easy. When class levels (be they associated or not) exceed racial HD they become the creature's primary source of power. You just work out the CR backwards; class levels first, then + racial HD (or +1/2 if non-associated).

Critical Ankle Bites (http://criticalanklebites.com/) had an obvious-in-hindsight aside about this in one of their articles:


A level 14 wizard is a CR 14 creature.
A stone giant is a CR 8 creature.
A stone giant with 14 levels of Wizard is a CR 15 creature.
…yeah, no.

Look, I know the whole “class levels that don’t play to a monster’s strengths add 1/2 CR” rule. But when you have 14 levels of wizard, Wizard is now your strength! “Stone Giant” is now the non-associated part! Reverse the math.

14 + (8/2) = 18. So make him a level 11 Wizard, and 11 + (8/2) = 15. Or something.

Good call on the NPC classes = 1/2 CR btw Tsotha-lanti.

[Oslecamo]

That one's easy. When class levels (be they associated or not) exceed racial HD they become the creature's primary source of power. You just work out the CR backwards; class levels first, then + racial HD (or +1/2 if non-associated).

Critical Ankle Bites (http://criticalanklebites.com/) had an obvious-in-hindsight aside about this in one of their articles:


Yeah, that stone giant/wizard 14 with 10 int will really scare the crap out of my players.

Or not. It's kinda hard casting 7 levels spells with 10 int.

And even if you gear him up with equipment to try to bypass that, he's still gona be weaker than the human wizard who started with a 16 at int and will be casting spells with good DCs.

You could give him an elite array and put the 15 in int, but it'll still be lower than the human wizard, and then the class stops being a nonassociated, because you're giving caster levels to someone with the right mental stat and has hands and voice to cast. This is, why would he develop his int if he didn't want to become a caster?

[Tsotha-lanti]

Good call on the NPC classes = 1/2 CR btw Tsotha-lanti.

Thanks!

The biggest pitfall (pratfall?) is wealth. I don't think NPC classes should get anything near the NPC wealth anyway, but you'll get some absolutely broken crap if you field a CR 10 human warrior 20 with 20th-level NPC wealth.

This is solved (more or less) by giving the NPC a level 10 treasure converted into gear, or just gear worth the average level 10 treasure value.

Edit:

You could give him an elite array and put the 15 in int, but it'll still be lower than the human wizard, and then the class stops being a nonassociated, because you're giving caster levels to someone with the right mental stat and has hands and voice to cast. This is, why would he develop his int if he didn't want to become a caster?

How it is going to be lower than the human wizard? The now CR 16 (+1 from elite array) giant has Int 18 (15 + 3 from the wizard HD), compared to the expected/average Int of ... wow, 19 for a 16th-level PC wizard (15 + 4 from HD).

The specific example is irrelevant to the point anyway. Is a cloud giant cleric a better example?

You are right, though, that whether a class is associated or not is really arbitrary. (Although the aforementioned stone giant certainly isn't CR 22, either.)

Edit again:
Actually, it's CR 15. PC class levels come free with an elite array.

[jcsw]

You forget that nearly all monster entries use the "crappy NPC" base stats, ie they all have 10s and 11s before racial adjustment. This "commoner" stat array is indicative of the average populace, something that any member of the race can be.

Notice how adventurers have obviously better stats, this is because they are not meant to be average.
An NPC Wizard is one who has been selected out of the highest potential of the populace, within the 90th percentile in terms of intelligence, to study magic.
They too, are certainly not average, and should be able to roll stats. (Or point buy)

Thus a giant wizard certainly doesn't have 10 intelligence, in fact, it could easily have 18.

[SoD]

Thus a giant wizard certainly doesn't have 10 intelligence, in fact, it could easily have 18.

Hardley easily, but I conced to your point.

[Tsotha-lanti]

Hardley easily, but I conced to your point.

No, really, easily. Stone giant with +0 Int modifier, 15 from elite array (free with PC class levels), +3 from HD. That's 18.

[Oslecamo]

No, really, easily. Stone giant with +0 Int modifier, 15 from elite array (free with PC class levels), +3 from HD. That's 18.

And the sun elf wizard has 22, making him actually a much more fearsome caster.

Besides, if you're giving wizard levels to a guy with 15 int, hands and who can talk, how exactly isn't it an associated class? It isn't the best combination in the world, but it works quite well. Stone giants aren't stupid. They're good at smashing stuff, but they're also decent at other stuff like magic, so wizard wouldn't be a nonassociated class.

Now dire bear/wizard, for example, won't really scare anyone, since it will have trouble casting the simplest of cantrips, since he has no hands, can't talk and has starting int 2.

[monty]

Now dire bear/wizard, for example, won't really scare anyone, since it will have trouble casting the simplest of cantrips, since he has no hands, can't talk and has starting int 2.

Unless you awaken it, in which case you have a 1/216 chance of getting 18 Int (and much better odds of getting a lower but still respectable number).

[Tsotha-lanti]

Besides, if you're giving wizard levels to a guy with 15 int, hands and who can talk, how exactly isn't it an associated class? It isn't the best combination in the world, but it works quite well. Stone giants aren't stupid. They're good at smashing stuff, but they're also decent at other stuff like magic, so wizard wouldn't be a nonassociated class.

According to the guidelines in the MM/SRD, it would be, since it doesn't play into the existing role/strengths of the creature (i.e. hitting things). Casting classes are only considered associated from the start if the creature already has casting ability in that class, in which case the levels stack with it. (So sorcerer levels are associated for dragons, but wizard levels are not. The best way to make broken dragons is wizard levels.)

[its_all_ogre]

And the sun elf wizard has 22, making him actually a much more fearsome caster..

mechanically maybe.

however i would be unimpressed by someone roleplaying being more scared than any elf wizard compared with a stone giant wizard.

especially if they both cast the same spell to the same effect.

massive pluses to natural ac, Str and Con do help a wizard you know.
a stone giant with 14 levels of wizard IS harder than an elf 14 wizard.

[only1doug]

mechanically maybe.

however i would be unimpressed by someone roleplaying being more scared than any elf wizard compared with a stone giant wizard.

especially if they both cast the same spell to the same effect.

massive pluses to natural ac, Str and Con do help a wizard you know.
a stone giant with 14 levels of wizard IS harder than an elf 14 wizard.

you may have overlooked the extra 119 HPs the stone Giant would also have on top of 14 levels of wizard with a +4 con bonus.

a stone giant with caster L14 could ruin your day with just two L3 spells; greater magic weapon and greater mighty Wallop. now it and its allies thrown rocks or club are 3 size categories bigger and have +3 to hit and damage (6d8+15 before strength increase for elite array).

[Doug Lampert]

According to the guidelines in the MM/SRD, it would be, since it doesn't play into the existing role/strengths of the creature (i.e. hitting things). Casting classes are only considered associated from the start if the creature already has casting ability in that class, in which case the levels stack with it. (So sorcerer levels are associated for dragons, but wizard levels are not. The best way to make broken dragons is wizard levels.)

The RAW for adding class levels are OBVIOUSLY horribly, horribly broken.

Take a monster, say it's CR10. Add elite abilities and NOTHING else, +1 CR. This isn't unreasonable, it's best attacks went up by +2 or so, it's HP by +1/HD or so, it's AC by 1 or so, several saves are up, it may well have better skills. It's likely a bit weak, but better feat choices can fix that and ballance it nicely.

Now take that monster: add 2 Cleric levels (+3 to two saves, +9+2xCon Mod additional HP, +1 BAB, two domain special powers, the ability to use magic sticks of CLW, and gear appropriate to a CR11 NPC, about 2/3rds of the time it gets a feat and about 1/2 the time an ability increase which can give an additional +1 to its important ability).

There is no additional increase in CR. NONE. Everything in the paragraph above combined isn't worth even +1 more to CR than what you already had for the elite abilities because elite abilities are "free" for monsters with PC class levels! It's +1 CR either way.

Appearently 2 cleric levels and level 11 NPC gear are so low value they don't need to be represented in the CR! (Note that a Wisdom score of 10+ is strictly optional for this "build", I'm not actually planning to cast level 0 or 1 spells as a significant part of the power of this creature's attacks although some of the cleric buffs are nice.)

Two more levels of Cleric adds 1 more to EVERY save, 2 to BAB, 9+2xCon Mod more HP, and another 2/3rds of a feat and 1/2 an ability point. Oh, yeah, and as an unimportant incidental your spellcasting improves and now includes all those level 2 cleric self buffs. That also is only +1 to CR.

Find a published monster with more HD than 2xCR (there are some, although I don't think any in core can reasonably take class levels, fortunately there's plenty of non-core out there), add non-associtated class levels (cleric is still best) equal to HD, congradulations, the creature's CLASS LEVEL exceeds it's CR, as if all the stuff it already had as a monster were a negative value. It's BAB is pretty well guaranteed to equal or exceed CR (even if it's a Fey with Wizard levels).

In my experience, LA+HD is a fine way to measure the combat value of a vaguely competent build monster with PC class levels and gear. The fact is that CONTRARY to WotC's explanation about how some abilities are worth more to a PC than an NPC the vast majority of stuff is useful based on how it works in combat, and for a PC or a competent NPC that's about even.

If a monster has regeneration, hard to bypass DR, incorporial, fast healing, or takes a very suboptimal build and class for that race then you may end up 1 or two points high in the CR if you use LA+HD (fast healing and DR type abilities really are worth more to a PC), but even in those cases you'll be FAR closer than the broken system in the MM will put you.

What makes for high LA is that most monsters are built to be an appropriate challenge with little or no gear, and PCs get gear which STACKS with the high numbers most monsters have for abilities and natural armor so they have appropriate attacks and AC for their CR without enhancement bonuses on their attacks, stat boosters from gear and spells, and without applying most of the six or so ways PCs typically improve their AC.

NPCs with gear appropriate to an NPC of the same level as their ECL as a PC are normally pretty close to being worth that ECL as their CR.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

No, really, easily. Stone giant with +0 Int modifier, 15 from elite array (free with PC class levels), +3 from HD. That's 18.

There is no gain from HD (unless of course you are talking about a Stone Giant with 10 class levels).

[Oslecamo]

mechanically maybe.

however i would be unimpressed by someone roleplaying being more scared than any elf wizard compared with a stone giant wizard.

especially if they both cast the same spell to the same effect.

massive pluses to natural ac, Str and Con do help a wizard you know.
a stone giant with 14 levels of wizard IS harder than an elf 14 wizard.

The sun elf wizard just polymorphed into a stone giant. Here, str, con and AC bonus. And he's still 1 CR lower.

Also, I don't know why everybody is complaining of the big pitcure:

Problem 1-People say it's easy to make broken characters who'll easily kill monsters of the same CR.
Problem 2-People complain that it's easy to make broken monsters who are stronger than regular characters of the same CR.

Solution:throw the optimized monsters to the optimized characters and let the blood feast begin! Hell, I would like to see the battle between the optimized stone giant wizard and a lv14 party.:smallbiggrin:

It all balances in the end. Why is everyone complaining so much?:smalltongue:

Also, mr. roboto:
1-Pick a construct
2-Give it the incarnate construct template, wich reduces it's CR by half and makes it a living creature.
3-Give it the half-golem template, wich gives +3CR and turns him again into a construct.
4-Repeat 2 and 3 untill you have something really sick, but of relatively low CR.
5-?
6-Profit.

[Tsotha-lanti]

There is no gain from HD (unless of course you are talking about a Stone Giant with 10 class levels).

Er, yes. It's the 14th-level stone giant wizard we were discussing. 4th, 8th, and 12th.


The RAW for adding class levels are OBVIOUSLY horribly, horribly broken.

Yeah, that was kinda the point of the thread.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Er, yes. It's the 14th-level stone giant wizard we were discussing. 4th, 8th, and 12th.

Well in that case you may add an additional ability increase for reaching 28 HD (2 wiz, 6 wiz, 10 wiz and 14 wiz). :smallsmile:

[Talic]

CR 19:

White Dragon, Adult (Large) - CR 10
17 Levels Rogue - +8.5 CR
1 Level Ninja - +0.5 CR

Now, at CR 19, I have a Large creature with 36 HD.

Assume it has the Darkstalker Feat.
Assume also, that the Rogue levels are Wilderness rogue.
It took Camouflage and Hide in Plain Sight.

It has 39 Ranks in Hide and Move Silently... and a -4 penalty for size. Assume Epic Skill focus in both, for +10. Let's add in Lingering Damage, and we have a hide of +45, Move silent +49. Let's further say he has barding, greater shadow. +60 hide, +49 move silent.

So now, it can snipe every round with a +40 to hide, and remain undetectable, mostly.

So, now that we have Hidden Dragon, where's Crouching Tiger?

[hamishspence]

what level is Sun elf wizard- isn't max for 1st levl 18, +2 Int, for 20?

[Draz74]

So, now that we have Hidden Dragon, where's Crouching Tiger?

Huh? Did someone say Rakshasa Swordsage?

[brujon]

Or... Awakened Dire Tiger Fighter 9/Weapon Master 7/Barbarian 2

=P

[Doug Lampert]

what level is Sun elf wizard- isn't max for 1st levl 18, +2 Int, for 20?

We're building NPC's here people. The Sun elf gets the SAME array as the stone giant. If the Stone Giant started with only 15 Int then the Sun Elf doesn't have an 18 to put in Int at level 1.

Apples to apples. We're comparing NPC's if we're discussing CR. NPCs with PC class levels ALL use the same elite NPC array, whether or not they have monster levels.

Even if the Sun Elf polymorphs it DOESN'T get elite abilities on its physical abilities (the elite array is better than standard on three abilities and only worse on one, and Int is only one ability), and it doesn't get the HP or HD of the stone giant, and it doesn't get as many feats, or proficiencies, or as many skill points, or the save bonuses, or... And it's used a spell and spent a round to be a crappy imitation of a Giant.

Meanwhile if I recall the (broken) 3.5 Epic rules correctly the Stone Giant is spending many of its extra feats on EPIC feats. (More than 20 total HD, and some of them are from class levels. I think it's epic even with a CR of 15 or so.) If it's spent a few of those on increasing its intelligence it may be SMARTER than the Sun Elf and STILL have more other feats.

The real giant will smash the hell out of the Sun Elf in anything like a fair fight whether or not the Elf polymorphs.

[hamishspence]

I was wondering how a INT 22 Sun Elf had been gotten.

[monty]

Sun elf has a +2 racial to Int, +2 from leveling.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Sun elf has a +2 racial to Int, +2 from leveling.

Elite array: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.

Sun Elf:
INT: 15 base + 2 racial + 3 from leveling (4,8,12 HD) = 20

Stone Giant:
INT: 15 base + 0 racial + 4 from leveling (16, 20, 24, 28 HD) + 3 from Great Intelligence x3 (21, 24, 27 HD) = 22

[Oslecamo]

Meanwhile if I recall the (broken) 3.5 Epic rules correctly the Stone Giant is spending many of its extra feats on EPIC feats. (More than 20 total HD, and some of them are from class levels. I think it's epic even with a CR of 15 or so.) If it's spent a few of those on increasing its intelligence it may be SMARTER than the Sun Elf and STILL have more other feats.


Who says you're allowed to give him epic feats? There are plenty non epic monsters with more than 20HD, and none of them have epic feats.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Who says you're allowed to give him epic feats? There are plenty non epic monsters with more than 20HD, and none of them have epic feats.

There is no rule that you must pick a feat or feature just because you qualify and that goes double for creatures published in a book with no Epic feats.

Only requirement is that you have more than 20 HD and are able to choose a feat.

[monty]

Elite array: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.

Sun Elf:
INT: 15 base + 2 racial + 3 from leveling (4,8,12 HD) = 20

Stone Giant:
INT: 15 base + 0 racial + 4 from leveling (16, 20, 24, 28 HD) + 3 from Great Intelligence x3 (21, 24, 27 HD) = 22

I realize that, but he was asking where the 22 Int Sun Elf came from. That would require an 18, though.

[Oslecamo]

There is no rule that you must pick a feat or feature just because you qualify and that goes double for creatures published in a book with no Epic feats.

Only requirement is that you have more than 20 HD and are able to choose a feat.

I don't think so.

At 21st level, and every three levels thereafter, the character may select an epic feat in place of a nonepic feat.

So, if you consider that the monster it's a 21st level character so it can gain epic feats, it must be at least CR 21. It's not based on HD.

There is no rule that says that elfs can't grow 5 extra arms as a swift action, but that doesn't mean they actually can do so. Same goes for picking epic feats. If you have them, you're automatically CR 21 or higher, because you're an epic creature.

[monty]

I don't think so.

At 21st level, and every three levels thereafter, the character may select an epic feat in place of a nonepic feat.

So, if you consider that the monster it's a 21st level character so it can gain epic feats, it must be at least CR 21. It's not based on HD.

There is no rule that says that elfs can't grow 5 extra arms as a swift action, but that doesn't mean they actually can do so. Same goes for picking epic feats. If you have them, you're automatically CR 21 or higher, because you're an epic creature.

Wait, what? Character level has nothing to do with CR. And character level is based entirely on HD.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

I realize that, but he was asking where the 22 Int Sun Elf came from. That would require an 18, though.

I misunderstood the meaning of your post then. I read it as supporting the notion that the 22 INT Sun Elf was a reasonable comparison. :smallsmile:

[Tsotha-lanti]

I don't think so.

At 21st level, and every three levels thereafter, the character may select an epic feat in place of a nonepic feat.

So, if you consider that the monster it's a 21st level character so it can gain epic feats, it must be at least CR 21. It's not based on HD.

No, it's based on hit dice. Levels are hit dice. Your ECL (for instance) is your HD/level (same thing) + your LA. Access to epic feats is based on HD.

If you need examples, the Draconomicon addresses this some, since dragons tend to have 21 HD or more.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

I don't think so.

At 21st level, and every three levels thereafter, the character may select an epic feat in place of a nonepic feat.

So, if you consider that the monster it's a 21st level character so it can gain epic feats, it must be at least CR 21. It's not based on HD.

Actually that is exactly what it is based on.

Character level = HD.

CR is an entirely different critter.

EDIT:

Only ninja'ed bu two... if we had multiquote maybe I would only have been nin'jaed by one.... :smallsigh: :smalltongue:

[hamishspence]

Well, Sarrukh from Serpent Kingdoms have comparable CR and Character Level - HD 14,LA+8 = CL 22, But Challenge Rating 21.

However they require massive DM ruling to avoid cheese.

[monty]

Well, Sarrukh from Serpent Kingdoms have comparable CR and Character Level - HD 14,LA+8 = CL 22, But Challenge Rating 21.

However they require massive DM ruling to avoid cheese.

Actually, they're ECL 22, which also has nothing to do with feats. And they're only the single most broken thing in any book ever published...

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

And they're only the single most broken thing in any book ever published...

At least they do not qualify for Epic feats.... :smallamused:

[hamishspence]

not them- their power. the power can't be used on a sarrukh itself to cheese out, since they are immune to their own power.

ECL counts for epic feats, From what I can tell. You are 22nd level character, you get epic feats. Races of Faerun supports this.

[Tsotha-lanti]

ECL counts for epic feats, From what I can tell. You are 22nd level character, you get epic feats. Races of Faerun supports this.

I think the 3.0 ELH may have, indeed, said that ECL (rather than HD) determines whether you're epic, but that was epicly broken.

RoF is, of course, 3.0.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

ECL counts for epic feats, From what I can tell. You are 22nd level character, you get epic feats. Races of Faerun supports this.

It is explained several places, most notably in the Draconomicon and the FAQ.


Okay, I’m confused by the current alphabet soup of
abbreviations dealing with exactly how tough a monster or
a character is. What are character level, class level, EL,
ECL, and CR? How do they relate to each other? Are they
interchangeable? If not, what are they used for?


The terms are not interchangeable. You can find definitions
of most of these terms in the PH glossary or in SS, but here’s an
overview.
Class Level: The total number of levels you have in a
particular class. A 5th-level fighter has 5 class levels in fighter.
A 5th-level fighter/5th-level wizard has 5 class levels in fighter
and 5 class levels in wizard. Class level affects so many things
it would be tedious to list them all in detail. The most important
include number of Hit Dice (1 per class level), base attack
bonus, base saving throw bonuses, and number of skill points,
all as shown in the description for the class. If a class gives you
bonus feats, it’s your class level that determines when you get
them.
In addition, most level-based variables for a class feature
depend on your class level, as does any level-based variable for
a spell you cast as a member of that class. Powers from clerical
domains are class features, and any level-based variables they
have depend on your level in the class that gives you access to
the domain.
Character Level: The total number of class levels you
have in all your classes, plus any racial Hit Dice you have. A
human 5th-level fighter/5th-level wizard has 10 character
levels. An ogre 5th-level fighter/5th-level wizard has 14
character levels (because it has 4 racial Hit Dice). Character
levels determine when you gain feats and ability score
increases (see Table 3–2: Experience and Level-Dependent
Benefits in the PH). Any feat you get by virtue of your
character level is in addition to any bonus feats from your class
levels.
In addition, your character level determines how much
experience you earn when you defeat a foe and how many
experience points you need to gain your next class level.
Effective Character Level (ECL): Effective character
level is character level plus the level adjustment for the
character’s race. Races that are more powerful than the
standard races in the PH have level adjustments to help
promote some equity among the player characters in a
campaign, and to help DMs decide how much danger a party
containing members of those races can handle. For example, a
drow has a level adjustment of +2. Many people (and even one
or two rulebooks) say “ECL” when they really mean “level
adjustment.”
Use the character’s ECL to determine starting equipment
and how the character earns and benefits from experience
(including when he gains an epic attack and save bonus; DMG
209), as noted on page 5 of SS. Use the actual character level
for everything else.

[hamishspence]

so, why don't they qualify for epic feats, if Races of Faerun says they do?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

so, why don't they qualify for epic feats, if Races of Faerun says they do?

Because Races of Faerun is an outdated 3.0 book.

[hamishspence]

DMG: ECL: Monsters with ECL above 20 are epic characters, get epic save bonus, epic attack bonus, and logically, qualify for epic feats.

EDIT:
going by DMG, the only important factor is ECL. an 18th level svirfneblin, say, is an epic character, despite only having 18 HD.

[hamishspence]

Am I wrong in my conclusion that if either HD or class levels, added to LA, exceeds 20, character is epic, must advance as epic, save and attack bonus-wise, and can choose epic feats? DMG seems to say this.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

DMG: ECL: Monsters with ECL above 20 are epic characters, get epic save bonus, epic attack bonus, and logically, qualify for epic feats.

EDIT:
going by DMG, the only important factor is ECL. an 18th level svirfneblin, say, is an epic character, despite only having 18 HD.


Yes, the confusion is complete. :smallsmile:

ECL would apply to save and attack bonuses, but would not make the character Epic. To be Epic you need to have a character level above 20 and LA does not count towards that.
So yes, you can have a non-Epic creature with Epic save and attack bonuses and does not qualify for Epic feats. :smallsigh:

EDIT: It gets even more interesting when you add the Dragon prestige classes that continue to advance base attack bonus and base saves rather than switching to Epic when reaching Epic character levels. :smallyuk:

[hamishspence]

So, we use "actual character level" for epic feats, ECL for save and attack bonus? Has Wizards said that in errata or published FAQ?

EDIT:
Draconomicon, oddly, uses the term "A 21st level character" for a young dragon whose ECL totals 21, because HD and LA total 21.

And the "At least old age" bit frequently contradicts the 21 HD bit- some dragons exceed 21 HD well before old age.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

So, we use "actual character level" for epic feats, ECL for save and attack bonus? Has Wizards said that in errata or published FAQ?

I quoted the FAQ above, but the DMG also clarifies the need for Character Level rather than ECL to reach 21 before being considered Epic.

[hamishspence]

It really isn't very clear in DMG- closest is ECL for save and attack bonuses, class level "for all other purposes", though later books do refer to "unstated prerequisite" that Character Level must be 21 or higher to take epic feats.

Draconomicon's phrase "A 20th level character" for a 10HD 5 Palaidin levels dragon with LA of +5 was perhaps not well chosen.

RoF was late 3.0, published after Savage Species, which is quoted in FAQ.

[Oslecamo]

Ah, found it.

Oficial D&D adventure "Stone dead"

Here we have a gargoyle cleric NPC, Krekulphyr.

Normal gargoyle it's CR 4 and has 4 HD. No spellcasting ability.

Krekulphyr has 10 cleric levels. Total CR:14. No, it hasn't got any special custom abilities to justify the extra CR.

In the "Black rain" oficial adventure we have a troll wizard 9. CR 14. Again, no special abilities. Hmm, wonder why...

So cleric/wizard/sorcerer levels aren't as nonassociated as you're claiming and they add the full levels. And the stone giant is actually CR 22.

Feel free to find any oficial advanced monsters and their respective CR to counter this. I'll go search the other oficial adventures I've gathered.

Otherwise, all you've got in your defense that the stone giant wizard 14 is just CR 15 is that cheesy interpretation of the rules.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Ah, found it.

Oficial D&D adventure "Stone dead"

Here we have a gargoyle cleric NPC, Krekulphyr.

Normal gargoyle it's CR 4 and has 4 HD. No spellcasting ability.

Krekulphyr has 10 cleric levels. Total CR:14. No, it hasn't got any special custom abilities to justify the extra CR.

In the "Black rain" oficial adventure we have a troll wizard 9. CR 14. Again, no special abilities. Hmm, wonder why...

So cleric/wizard/sorcerer levels aren't as nonassociated as you're claiming and they add the full levels. And the stone giant is actually CR 22.

Feel free to find any oficial advanced monsters and their respective CR to counter this. I'll go search the other oficial adventures I've gathered.

Otherwise, all you've got in your defense that the stone giant wizard 14 is just CR 15 is that cheesy interpretation of the rules.

Is it nonsensical and inaccurate as a measure of the challenge? Yes.
Does it require a cheesy and non-obvious interpretation of the rules? Not at all.


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.

[hamishspence]

Corroborating evidence would be things with less than 21 HD+class levels put together, but epic feats because of high LA.

Monsters as epic characters
"The epic rules in this section also work for monsters, using the monsters Effecive Character Level (ECL), instead of just its class levels"

so, in effect by your interpretation, LA is a major punishment for all epic players- you're playing an epic character that cannot access epic feats.

EDIT:
I've just checked- epic handbook book follows Races of Faerun exactly, true, both are 3.0, but they state very clearly an ECL of 21 qualifies as an epic character that can select epic feats.

What changed in 3.5? Your FAQ seems to me to only cover things that explicitly state Character level- say, Fighter 11, for example.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Corroborating evidence would be things with less than 21 HD+class levels put together, but epic feats because of high LA.

Monsters as epic characters
"The epic rules in this section also work for monsters, using the monsters Effecive Character Level (ECL), instead of just its class levels"

so, in effect by your interpretation, LA is a major punishment for all epic players- you're playing an epic character that cannot access epic feats.

It sucks royally! Having your save and BAB progression turned Epic is a very non-epic event. :smallamused:

[hamishspence]

I'm guessing that when they say "Use the character level for everything else" they forgot to say "except epic feats"

Still, DMG doesn't explicitly state ECL is not character level for feat purposes, and subsequent books phrase it as "ECL is charcter level" as in "An ECL 20 dragon is a 20th level character"

I'd say ignore the Old bit- 21 HD means dragon gets epic feats, however old it is.

I'm told FAQ might not be RAW, only books and errata.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

I'm guessing that when they say "Use the character level for everything else" they forgot to say "except epic feats"

Still, DMG doesn't explicitly state ECL is not character level for feat purposes, and subsequent books phrase it as "ECL is charcter level" as in "An ECL 20 dragon is a 20th level character"

I'd say ignore the Old bit- 21 HD means dragon gets epic feats, however old it is.

Well a 20 ECL human wizard is also character level 20... Just because ECL is not character level it does not mean that they can never be equal.


I'm told FAQ might not be RAW, only books and errata.
That is correct, but it is sometimes a nice reference when the RAW becomes to obscure. :-p

[hamishspence]

No, wizard is Class Level 20 :smallbiggrin: And, character level 20.

If we refer to it that way- hmm.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

No, wizard is Class Level 20 :smallbiggrin: And, character level 20.

If we refer to it that way- hmm.

Human, say 20 year old, wizard 20:

Class level 20
Character level 20
ECL 20
HD 20

:smallwink:

[hamishspence]

Ah, but whats something with 5 HD, 10 Class levels, LA +5?

Is it:

ECL 20
Class level 5
Character level 15? As your argument would seem to indicate?
For feats and saves that might be right, but not experience.
But what about:

6HD, 10 class levels, LA +5?

Logically, that leaps the normal feats, BAB, and saves, and begins the epic progression.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Ah, but whats something with 5 HD, 10 Class levels, LA +5?


Yes, character level 15 and ECL 20.

On that note; There would not be much point using effective in front of character level if it had absolutely no meaning.

[monty]

I think they mean by ECL that you add racial hit dice to determine feats, not LA.

[hamishspence]

it has meaning until you hit epic, arguably. Then, you're not just ECL21, you are "a 21st level character", with all that implies. Save, BAB, and, possibly, epic feats.

yes, a CL 15 ECL20 charcater would only have the number of feats of a 15th level character, but one level up, and the feat progression changes.

[Tsotha-lanti]

Ah, found it.

Oficial D&D adventure "Stone dead"

Here we have a gargoyle cleric NPC, Krekulphyr.

Normal gargoyle it's CR 4 and has 4 HD. No spellcasting ability.

Krekulphyr has 10 cleric levels. Total CR:14. No, it hasn't got any special custom abilities to justify the extra CR.

In the "Black rain" oficial adventure we have a troll wizard 9. CR 14. Again, no special abilities. Hmm, wonder why...

So cleric/wizard/sorcerer levels aren't as nonassociated as you're claiming and they add the full levels. And the stone giant is actually CR 22.

Feel free to find any oficial advanced monsters and their respective CR to counter this. I'll go search the other oficial adventures I've gathered.

Otherwise, all you've got in your defense that the stone giant wizard 14 is just CR 15 is that cheesy interpretation of the rules.

Er, they stop being nonassociated when they exceed your racial HD. We've, you know, been discussing that too, and it's in the rules/guidelines.

The troll has 6 racial HD and 9 wizard HD. The gargoyle has 4 racial HD and 10 cleric HD.

The only thing this suggests is that all the levels are associated once they exceed your racial HD - which would actually be an incorrect interpretation.

Fortunately, official adventures don't override the rules themselves. Heck, if sourcebooks did, we'd have a whole mess of rules changed by the sheer number of poorly-written stats and miscalculated CRs in Dragons of Faerûn.

Here are the rules on the subject:


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 1/2 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.

They're very clear.

"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".

That's pretty cut and dry.

This doesn't mean they aren't silly and shouldn't be changed, but that's houseruling, and not the RAW.

[hamishspence]

Is my case that all 21st level characters, no matter how few HD or Class levels they have, are epic characters, can take epic feats, use epic feat and experience progression, epic save bonus and epic attack bonus, correct, or incorrect?

[Oslecamo]

They're very clear.

"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".

That's pretty cut and dry.

This doesn't mean they aren't silly and shouldn't be changed, but that's houseruling, and not the RAW.

Ignore ALL material and interpretations that doesn't suport my point of view. Lovely. Let's check that "clear" part again shall we?

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.

It says that it's associated for a creature that already has the ability to cast spells. BUT it doesn't say the contrary. It neither says it's only associated for creatures with spellcasting ability, nor does it say it will never be associated with creatures without spellcasting ability. It's anything but clear.


You want the rules to be broken. It doesn't matter how they were written, you would interpret them in such a way they are broken.

Of course all oficial adventures would have the CRs calculated wrongly for monsters with class levels. Of course there isn't one single example to suport your interpretation of the rules on nonassociated class monsters.

[hamishspence]

Sorcerer levels and dragon CR stack cos a Great Red Wyrm with 20 sorcerer levels is effectively a 39th level sorcerer- that right? CR26+20 = CR46

But, a dragon-wizard would not have associated levels-
Great Red Wyrm 20th level wizard would be- CR26+CR10= CR36?

[Tsotha-lanti]

Sorcerer levels and dragon CR stack cos a Great Red Wyrm with 20 sorcerer levels is effectively a 39th level sorcerer- that right? CR26+20 = CR46

But, a dragon-wizard would not have associated levels-
Great Red Wyrm 20th level wizard would be- CR26+CR10= CR36?

This is correct, and is explicitly apparent from the rules. Dragons can already cast as sorcerers; therefore any and all sorcerer levels are associated. They can't already cast as wizards; therefore wizard levels are not associated until they exceed racial HD.


Of course all oficial adventures would have the CRs calculated wrongly for monsters with class levels. Of course there isn't one single example to suport your interpretation of the rules on nonassociated class monsters.

Oh yawn.

Okay, let's assume the books have it right.

Dragons of Faerûn, page 13: Aerosclughpalar, CR 26 old gold dragon druid 11. That's CR 21 for old gold dragon, +5 for druid 11 (which suggests it's rounded down; incorrect, I believe).

Page 19: Craugiyliamatar, CR 28 ancient green dragon rogue 4/druid 4. CR 21 for ancient green dragon, ... +7 for rogue 4/druid 4? Okay, go figure. Something's still not associated, obviously enough. Green dragons are sneaky anyway, so we can probably assume it's the druid levels, which gets you +4 for rogue, +2 for druid, and go figure what the other +1 is from.

Page 146+, the big listing.
Aurathator, CR 15, old white dragon sorcerer 5. That's CR 15 for old white dragon, +0 for sorcerer 5?

Arendelonthos, CR 14, young silver dragon paladin 7. That's CR 7 for young silver dragon, +7 for paladin 7 (which is associated because dragons are big and smashy, and paladins get full BAB).

Daurgothoth, one of my favorites. CR 50 great wyrm black dracolich wizard 20/archmage 5. That's CR 22 for great wyrm black dragon (37 HD), +3 for dracolich, +25 for class levels. (Incidentally, this is an example in the other direction. The dragon is nowhere near a CR 50 threat. I guess, by way of correction, class levels past 20 could be just counted as associated in any case, and we'd get CR 40 - much better, but still too high.)

And so on.

Wow, a single book is contradictory within itself (necessarily, then, getting the rules wrong either this way or that). I guess sourcebooks, much less adventures, aren't infallible?