I can't find a reason way these monsters Spell Resistance don't calculate

[Cerealkiller]

The first number is the Book's Spell Resistance value. The second number is how Spell Resistance is calculated Challenge Rating + 11 the third number is the difference between the two. Can someone please explain way these do not match and calculate I have looked over many sources both in the official book and SDR?

Achaierai 20 16 4
Aeon, paracletus 7 13 -6
Angel, movanic deva 23 21 2
Azata, ghaele 25 24 1
Demon, shadow 17 18 -1
Devil, belier 28 27 1
Div, pairaka 22 18 4
Elf, drow 7 12 -5
Faerie dragon 14 13 1
Garuda 21 20 1
Gremlin, pugwampi 7 12 -5
Intellect devourer 23 19 4
Kami, shikigami 16 13 3
Lukwata 27 22 5
Mercane 20 16 4
Night hag 24 20 4
Nightshade, nightwave 29 31 -2
Qlippoth, shoggti 31 18 13
Qlippoth, thulgant 25 29 -4
Rakshasa 25 21 4
Rakshasa, dandasuka 20 16 4
Rakshasa, maharaja 35 31 4
Rakshasa, marai 23 19 4
Rakshasa, raktavarna 17 13 4
Rakshasa, tataka 30 26 4
Roper 27 23 4
Sprite, grig 16 12 4

[Epic Meepo]

Cerealkiller wrote:

Achaierai 20 16 4
Intellect devourer 23 19 4
Mercane 20 16 4
Night hag 24 20 4
Rakshasa 25 21 4
Rakshasa, dandasuka 20 16 4
Rakshasa, maharaja 35 31 4
Rakshasa, marai 23 19 4
Rakshasa, raktavarna 17 13 4
Rakshasa, tataka 30 26 4
Roper 27 23 4
Sprite, grig 16 12 4

If I'm not mistaken, the monsters quoted above are all creatures that have historically had better than 50% magic resistance, so their SR is intentionally higher than normal in the 3.x ruleset. (I imagine it was set 4 points higher than normal so it exactly counterbalances the Spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration feats.)

The pairaka div is an entirely new monster, so it doesn't have any historical magic resistance, but I'm assuming it was intentionally assigned SR = CR +15 to fit the pattern of the highly-magic-resistant creatures listed above.

[Are]

CR+11 is only the most typical SR value. Certain creatures (such as those on your list) exist with SR values that are lower or higher, depending on if the creature is particularly vulnerable to magic or particularly resistant to magic.

It's worth noting that several creatures with low or high SR values in 3.5 have received the typical value of CR+11 in Pathfinder. I believe I read somewhere that the Pathfinder designers felt that there should only be a limited number of creatures that deviated from the norm.

[Cerealkiller]

Are wrote:

CR+11 is only the most typical SR value. Certain creatures (such as those on your list) exist with SR values that are lower or higher, depending on if the creature is particularly vulnerable to magic or particularly resistant to magic.

It's worth noting that several creatures with low or high SR values in 3.5 have received the typical value of CR+11 in Pathfinder. I believe I read somewhere that the Pathfinder designers felt that there should only be a limited number of creatures that deviated from the norm.

I don't make sense that these monsters are the exception. Then why have rules to calculate anything in the game. If they are not going to fallow the rules they set down or even give an explaination to why these monsters are different from the rules.

[Distant Scholar]

"SR must be CR+11" isn't a rule, any more than "CR 11 monsters must have AC 25" is a rule. They're both guidelines in the Bestiary appendix.

(My book states "As a general rule a creature’s spell resitance should equal its CR + 11." In my experience at least, when something says "as a general rule", it means it's usually true, but not always. And, no, I don't know why they spelled it "resitance".)

[cranewings]

Cerealkiller wrote:

Are wrote:

CR+11 is only the most typical SR value. Certain creatures (such as those on your list) exist with SR values that are lower or higher, depending on if the creature is particularly vulnerable to magic or particularly resistant to magic.

It's worth noting that several creatures with low or high SR values in 3.5 have received the typical value of CR+11 in Pathfinder. I believe I read somewhere that the Pathfinder designers felt that there should only be a limited number of creatures that deviated from the norm.

I don't make sense that these monsters are the exception. Then why have rules to calculate anything in the game. If they are not going to fallow the rules they set down or even give an explaination to why these monsters are different from the rules.

Why have a beastiary? The gm could just use the average monster stats chart for exert thing and pick a few feats and abilities.

[cranewings]

For the record, I think the monsters are to similar. I get sick of seeing Invisibility and energy projection on every third monster past cr 6.

If you think they are too variable, and I think they are too similar, then they are probably fine.

[Ravingdork]

I'm not seeing ANY SR on the Shoggti Qlippoth.

[Cerealkiller]

Ravingdork wrote:

I'm not seeing ANY SR on the Shoggti Qlippoth.

Your right thanks for the correction.