Gnolls have darkvision, +1 nat armor, and a 15 str. That's all they have going for them. Yet, at 2 HD, they're a CR 1.
So 2 HD Gnolls have 11 hp, a 15 AC (including a shield they can't actually use with the spear they're two-handing, so really 13 AC), and +3 to hit with a spear for 1d8+3 (or +2 power attack for 1d8+6).
A 1 HD Half-Orc fighter gets darkvision also, but using the NPC array she has 13 hp (14 con, favored class), a 16 AC (scalemail, 12 dex), +5 to hit (17 str, weapon focus) for 1d8+4 or power attack for 1d8+7. And that's with only medium armor and a simple weapon. Fighters get heavy armor and martial weapons. And full BAB. And more feats.
So is it just me, or does the CR 1/2 fighter completely pwn the CR 1 Gnoll in every way? Better stats, more feats and skills, better proficiencies, better BAB. Yet for some reason the Gnoll is a higher CR.
What bothers me is they look so imposing towering over most PCs and they topple too easy. It's anticlimactic.
Sorry I know this has little to do with your topic,mbut I used them in a session the night before last. All my golly minis are pretty big and look bad@ss. I'm going to start giving them all levels to make them as scary as they look.
Orcs and/or PC-classed NPCs are the outliers at low levels, IMO.
Weren't they Large in 3.x? Could be a holdover from when their weapons did more base damage?
Power Attack is probably not the most fantastic feat for them.
Take a look around for something that might help them out a bit more.
As a general rule of thumb, the default feats that monsters have are abysmal.
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/monsters/monsterAdvancement.html
Skip the part about templates and racial HD, and note some of the details for adding class levels.
Another thing to consider is that Orcs are really stupid, unwise, uncharismatic, and while gnolls are not that much better, they are described as far more sophisticated enemies. They should also have a good amount more loot, 260gp for the gnoll, and presumably ~90gp for the orc.
I think it is also an error* that orcs have ferocity. They should have "orc ferocity" as per the half orc in the core rules.
*Note: Not a real error, just my opinion.
EDIT: The gnoll also has a better will save then the orc. Since color spray and sleep probably do more damage to humanoid populations then everything else combined, that might make a difference.
Orcs and/or PC-classed NPCs are the outliers at low levels, IMO.
I see your point. It's hard to compare low level PCs who get a better stat array and max hp at first.
Let's make our Half-Orc a CR 1/2 Lv 2 Warrior.
Now, she's about even with the gnoll. She's got the 15 AC assuming 11 dex, the same 15 str with her racial +2, same feat and same damage, but still better to hit with her +2 BAB and better average hp with her d10 HD. And again, that's using only medium armor and simple weapons even though she gets heavy and martial.
So the CR 1/2 warrior still at least matches if not slightly outmatches the CR 1 Gnoll.
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/monsters/monsterAdvancement.html
Skip the part about templates and racial HD, and note some of the details for adding class levels.
I know, that's the part that's bugging me right now. I'm trying to make a mid-level Gnoll party with character levels, and they're CR 7s when they should probably be CR 5s or 6s.
They have mediocre stats, they don't have natural weapons, they're down 1 BAB. I don't see why they're rated as high as they are.
I see what you are saying. Normally I like to give things a level or two of monk (saves, bonus feat, wis to AC, etc.) but they don't have a high enough CR to get those levels without a CR bump.
I found hyenas make gnolls a much more serious threat. High speed trip machines make the gnolls seem more impressive then they really are.
Orcs and/or PC-classed NPCs are the outliers at low levels, IMO.I see your point. It's hard to compare low level PCs who get a better stat array and max hp at first.
Let's make our Half-Orc a CR 1/2 Lv 2 Warrior.
Now, she's about even with the gnoll. She's got the 15 AC assuming 11 dex, the same 15 str with her racial +2, same feat and same damage, but still better to hit with her +2 BAB and better average hp with her d10 HD. And again, that's using only medium armor and simple weapons even though she gets heavy and martial.
So the CR 1/2 warrior still at least matches if not slightly outmatches the CR 1 Gnoll.
Certainly the level 2 warrior is towards the high end of CR 1/2 and the gnoll is towards the low end of CR 1. Looking at the Monster Statistics by CR table, they both fall in about the middle. They're lower on HP, but higher on AC.
Weren't they Large in 3.x? Could be a holdover from when their weapons did more base damage?
Makes sense, I use DDM minis and they look pretty damn big.
From a combined role-play and tactics point of view, gnolls are definitely pack hunters and should be ruthless when they gang up on one foe. I know i'm not the only person to dm them this way. However, I don't think would be weighed into cr.
I had this problem when I was reviewing the gnoll as well. Based on what is presented he should be 1/2 CR. Basic med creature with +1 nat armor, darkvision and average stats is 1/3, 2 HD takes him to 1/2.
