This is a problem that goes back at least to 1e AD&D - the monsters are statted and XPV'd on the basis that their AC, damage etc is fixed. Start giving the hill giants platemail and shields, or the Marilith magic swords, rings, amulets and bracers and yes, they do get boosted far beyond their CR/XPV. Whereas NPC CR/XPV assumes they have and use equipment so they are not AC 10 making unarmed attacks, monster stats do not.
With 3e & Pathfinder the biggest problem is AC; many monsters have huge Natural Armour bonuses baked in, and it's easy per RAW to give them items or spells that boost them to unhittable levels - I made that mistake with a red dragon when I first ran 3e; it buffed its AC so no Fighter could hit it. The designers who gave it spell levels and assigned a CR either had no idea what they were doing, or expected the GM to deliberately play it sub-optimally.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Click user name and then "Send Private Message" :)*paging Ciretose, paging Ciretose*So there is a page feature on the boards. I haven't found it.
Did you really do that lol that's terrible.
Like starting a conversation with Hamas and then suddenly "Hey Mossad, what do you think?"
|
Dirty Secret: 3e/3.5e Dragons were deliberately under-CR'd to make them more of a challenge. The designers thought that dragons should be a superior challenge to other monsters of the same CR, and banked them 2-3 points (so a CR 14 3.5 Dragon was actually CR 16-17).
Of course, it was a terribad decision which resulted in a lot of unintended TPKs. And rightly done away with in Pathfinder (along other monster CR fixes, Ogre Mage I am oh so looking at you).
|
|
Click user name and then "Send Private Message" :)*paging Ciretose, paging Ciretose*So there is a page feature on the boards. I haven't found it.Did you really do that lol that's terrible.
Like starting a conversation with Hamas and then suddenly "Hey Mossad, what do you think?"
It's worse. I didn't even message Ciretose. He heard that uncanny sound of Ashiel clashing with somebody and got here ASAP. :D
Dirty Secret: 3e/3.5e Dragons were deliberately under-CR'd to make them more of a challenge. The designers thought that dragons should be a superior challenge to other monsters of the same CR, and banked them 2-3 points (so a CR 14 3.5 Dragon was actually CR 16-17).
Of course, it was a terribad decision which resulted in a lot of unintended TPKs. And rightly done away with in Pathfinder (along other monster CR fixes, Ogre Mage I am oh so looking at you).
True about 3e dragon CR, but IME with a 3e red dragon you can remove its spellcaster levels entirely and it's *still* over-CR'd! Eg a 3e CR 12 red dragon was actually about CR 14 once you took away its caster levels. With optimised spell use it was more like CR 18-19.
I think monster use of spells or items to buff its defenses is a separate issue that applies to a whole range of monsters, including Pathfinder monsters AFAICS. It's easy to use optimised allocation of items via treasure or NPC wealth by level on top of high CR monster stats to create something unhittable. This is also an issue with offense, but to a much lesser extent - items that boost save DCs to unsaveable levels are probably the biggest issue.
|
It's worse. I didn't even message Ciretose. He heard that uncanny sound of Ashiel clashing with somebody and got here ASAP. :DClick user name and then "Send Private Message" :)*paging Ciretose, paging Ciretose*So there is a page feature on the boards. I haven't found it.Did you really do that lol that's terrible.
Like starting a conversation with Hamas and then suddenly "Hey Mossad, what do you think?"
I looked up into the night sky and saw that somewhere, someone was wrong on the internet. So I put on my suit (I have one. I am currently wearing it. It includes a cape, obviously) and came here to save the day.
On topic, this is what bothers me about this.
If on one topic you argue the GM should make obviously adjustments if the players mess up (increasing difficulty for retreating for example, as the BBEG would regroup) you hear a scream of GM FIAT!!!
On the other hand, if rather than using the treasure chart you arbitrarily decide to add items to creatures...
In my game whenever time permits the enemies get items that make sense for the enemy. A cleric of Zon Kuthon is going to have a spiked chain and a cleric of Desna is going to have a starknife.
I ask the question "What makes sense for them to have at this point, based on what they know."
And the only person who can adjudicate that question is the GM.
At the same time I also realize foreknowledge is an advantage. A party that gets to ambush is much better off than one that is ambushed.
So you adjust the encounter accordingly.
Similarly some encounters are really easy for some parties and nightmares for others, which is generally the fault of parties being groups of solo adventurers rather than a well oiled machine working together to be ready for anything.
If you give your monsters items to use beyond what is listed, you change the encounter. If that does or does not raise CR varies (as JJ said) but it definately changes the encounter.
To say it doesn't is just wrong.
|
|
This is a problem that goes back at least to 1e AD&D - the monsters are statted and XPV'd on the basis that their AC, damage etc is fixed. Start giving the hill giants platemail and shields, or the Marilith magic swords, rings, amulets and bracers and yes, they do get boosted far beyond their CR/XPV. Whereas NPC CR/XPV assumes they have and use equipment so they are not AC 10 making unarmed attacks, monster stats do not.
With 3e & Pathfinder the biggest problem is AC; many monsters have huge Natural Armour bonuses baked in, and it's easy per RAW to give them items or spells that boost them to unhittable levels - I made that mistake with a red dragon when I first ran 3e; it buffed its AC so no Fighter could hit it. The designers who gave it spell levels and assigned a CR either had no idea what they were doing, or expected the GM to deliberately play it sub-optimally.
I think the designers went on the assumption that both sides are suddenly side by side with neither being able to pre-buff, and action economy playing out as it does.
In game, this isn't how it usually works.
If a party is able to make good choices and get the drop on a monster who is unprepared, the encounter is much easier.
If the party makes bad choices and the monster gets to buff and get the drop on them...
The problem of the legendary RoTRL TPK was not as much the creature, but that the creature had all the time in the world to buff and was fighting under optimal conditions for the abilities they possessed.
An intelligent BBEG is going to do all they can to "win", which could include having weapons/items to help them win.
On the other hand, as happened in a game I ran last night, if the players get the drop on the BBEG when they aren't wearing armor or buffed...
|
|
Ashiel we have had this discussion before. The monsters are assumed to be played as is. I even quoted the rules for it.
What makes sense and what the rules are, are two different things. Does it make sense for a monster to have its treasure in random rooms in his lair/dungeion/etc instead of having it with him so he can murdalize any invaders? Hell naw(not misspelled). Does it happen and is even suggested? Yes.
Do I give my baddies the chance to use their wealth to get better gear, and sometime just ignore the wealth they are supposed to have? Many times yes, but I normally get better than average players so I tend to ignore certain reccomendation such as what percentage of an NPC wealth should go to defense. I also admit that a CR 5 for my group, when I get to GM again, might be another group's CR 7.
Mojorat, Ashiel is speaking of using a monster's treasure to buy additional gear, not use what the book gives them.
This.
For someone who complains about arguments being mis-characterized (even when linked too...) this was pretty bad.
What the other side has always said is that the CR is presumed based on monster as written. Many monsters actually have the magical equipment included in the build, so it isn't as if this was not considered by the devs.
Now, if within the treasure you add additional items, that isn't wrongbadfun but it does modify the encounter in the same way as having the dragon be in a cave where they can't fly around modifies the encounter.
Adding things makes it more is something pretty basic.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@gerraint elberion: it doesn't come across as antagonistic at all, I appreciate the candor, but if you read the post history, I'm not a blind Ashiel cheerleader, when we do disagree I say so. Last time I can think of was over the charm person interpretation, where we got locked into debate and had to start a new thread to move the argument to, which in turn got locked. Not that that's a glowing example of me contributing to a harmonious message board either, but there it is. We still don't agree, but we're still cool
Grimmy isn't Tels.
Ashiel contributes a lot of interesting ideas to the messageboard. They just all tend to be on one side. As I said, he is the Tim Taylor from Tool Time of the messageboard.
And Gorby is Al :)
If you have enough time and energy to equip every "monster" individually then that's great. I don't. I do use the stats direct from the Bestiary. I also enjoy the wandering monster charts in PF AP's as they give local flavour and an idea of the flora and fauna of a particular area. Most wandering creatures don't carry much with them, so that also saves me time working out treasure.
I also don't adhere to WBL, especially when running AP's. They seem to have about the right amount of reward without adding anything for extra/random encounters. As many people have stated AP difficulty levels are a little weak for tactical/thoughtful players, so a little cash starvation tends to add to the drama.
Unless I've missed it, perfectly possible, nobody seems to have asked where monstrous, albeit intelligent, creatures are supposed to shop for their magic armour, weapons and scrolls. If they make them or have workshops that make magic items for them then enterprising player may choose to track back to this base, thereby making the GM stat out a whole area and equip the NPC's therein ( not to mention theWBL implications.)
Or do you decide that they found the items and are now utilising them? In which case you know the random chance of finding exactly the right gear, in the right size? Just think back to the last time you went clothes shopping, and those guys are supposed to stock everything you want . The chances of a group of creatures randomly finding the same gear is slight, so do you stat every single creature in every single encounter individually? Or did they target people equipped with the items they need? A difficult task considering that the prey would be using the items in defence. Would these battles then up the creatures own XP? (which could be used as an excuse to up the CR on well equipped monsters).
These are all questions which deserve some thought and time to implement, and if you have that amount of time and energy, while juggling RL concerns and taxes, then great. However I would ask that you...
This was an interesting post that I missed the first time around. Regarding the last part, about who has the time and energy to prep unique stat blocks, I want to say that I'm not forgetting the people who don't, or saying they are doing anything wrong.
Running the stat blocks with only the listed gear equiped has worked ok for me for a long time, and my new habit of giving monsters some useful and unique equipment from their own treasure is just something that spices things up, and certainly hasn't hurt.
I also have found that while it keeps things surprising and challenging, it hasn't warranted a change in CR rating for me, and has actually made the difficulty of the encounters fall more in line with the way they are described. I would say a mix of both is fine, as time and circumstances permits.
Also there are products out there that have done the work for you, I use an array of custom monsters and villains from Raging Swan press and they are awesome.
Yeah, who were you on Cheers again?
|
|
I'm not so sure. The advanced simple template is not that great in my experiences. It certainly doesn't work for everything. In fact, I'd go so far as to say there are more NPCs that it doesn't work for than it does. On some creatures, it can throw their numbers into the stratosphere (for example, toss the advanced template on a big zombie and you'll add a ton more HP, since it gets +2 HP / HD), while others it influences their abilities so marginally that you wouldn't notice (for example, suggesting that the advanced template moves a pit fiend from a CR 20 to CR 21 encounter is laughable). I think the advanced template is as misleadingly bad as the skeletal champion template (which is the template that I think stringburka [sorry if I'm wrong!] used to break the CR system into pieces with the CR 5 skeletal uberfiend).
It usually jazzes things up by about the right amount per the Monster Creation rules table. I mean it adds +2 HP per hit die, +2 AC, +2 to hit, +2 damage per attack, +2 Save DC and +2 to all Saves...that's enough to take a CR 19 to better than CR 20 by the stats in the monster creation stuff (the differences are +40 HP, +2 AC, +1 to hit, +10 damage total, +1 Save DC, +1 to all Saves...assuming 20+ HD and at least a few attacks, that's likely more than the listed changes in every category). Of course, things like Caster Level don't increase, but as a quick way to get +1 CR...it seems about right.
We're talking about the rules as they are, here, not the way we might wish they are. Right?
Fair enough. However, I want to look at something concerning that.
+5 large non-humanoid mithral chain shirt (29,100 gp)
+2 amulet of natural armor (8,000 gp)
+2 ring of protection (8,000 gp)
+3 cloak of resistance (9,000 gp)
6 longswords plus about 4,000 gp left.
Something like that...though the Ring's useless due to existing Deflection modifier.
I'd also get her something offensive (a Belt of Str is hugely worth it for her, and a Headband of Cha doesn't suck either) to round her out if going up a CR.
Looking at her gear...I still don't see a CR increase. She's just more defensive. Her AC is nothing impressive at CR 17 (seriously, it's 32 counting her deflection bonuses and high dexterity, which is hit-able 55% of the time with only a +17 BAB and a +5 weapon). Even if she was wearing all this gear, she would tap out at AC 45. Difficult to hit at this level, but not impossible. BAB +17, +7 Strength, +5 weapon hits on a 16 (25% chance to land the hit). That's before buffs like haste, weapon training/specialization, favored enemy, smite, etc.
Sure. So? Again, we're talking about the CR rules as they are, here, not PCs odds of beating those standards. So let's look at those standards:
Default CR 17: 270 HP, 32 AC, +27 to hit, 90 damage, Save DC 24, Good Saves of +20, Bad Saves of +15.
Marlith: 264 HP, 32 AC, +25 to hit, 140 damage, Save DC 23, Good Save +25, Bad Saves +18 and +13.
Those look right on par. More damage, lower to-hit, slightly low HP and Save DC.
So, going with the gear you list (but replacing the Ring with a Belt and Headband, each +2), we wind up with:
Well Equipped Marlith: 264 HP, 43 AC, +26 to hit, 150 damage, Save DC 24, Good Save +28, Bad Saves +21 and +16.
Which compares well to CR 18:
Default CR 18: 300 HP, 33 AC, +28 to hit, 100 damage, Save DC 25, Good Saves of +20, Bad Saves of +16.
Indeed, it compares better to CR 18 than the unequipped version does to CR 17.
So, yeah, that's pretty much a point of CR there. Maybe more so if you rearrange things a little (a +4 belt makes it even clearer)...but it clearly puts her stats a full CR or more up.
Plus, she'd have invested almost all of her wealth into merely being able to melee with the party martial without it being an act of self-inflicted suicide. She still looks highly vulnerable to crowd control to me, and she's still vulnerable to debuffing herself.
Just making an observation.
Sure, she's vulnerable to an equal level party. All monsters are. Indeed, equal CR encounters are supposed to be relatively easy for PCs mainly serving to force them to expend resources rather than being serious threats.
But we're not talking about how to make monsters threatening per se, we're talking about at what point use of gear adds to CR. I'd say a +10 AC is likely clearly past that point, especially if combined with minor bonuses in other areas.
You want risky fights, make them higher CR (as my standard game session involving three or four CR +2 fights folowed by a CR+3 final battle seem to demonstrate).
|
Now, as to rhetoric. It's you, who in your opening post, kicked off by condescending on people who have a different opinion on rules from you. You can't be thick-skinned when speaking of others and a delicate little flower when others criticize you.Um, say what? Okay, I take it back. You do seem to lie about my posts. Exactly how is noting my problems with an argument that an unnamed person has made equate to speaking condescendingly to them?I think you might want to be more circumspect about your use of the word 'stupid' if you don't think you were being condescending...
Is there a point...?
I don't have a point exactly. More like I'm ranting about something that I see as simply stupid...
The idea that sentient creatures just burst into coins, or carry huge amounts of absolutely useless treasure? I'll continue to say that is stupid. That is one of the stupidest things that I've ever heard. If you told me to set my hair on fire, I'd tell you that was a stupid idea. If you told me that we found a +2 sword in the dungeon where we had just dispatched some 50 hobgoblins and not a single one was wielding the sword, I'd say that was stupid too.
Calling an argument stupid is not being condescending to the person making the argument. It's calling the argument stupid. There is no harm in calling the absurd the absurd, nor would I find it unfair to say "I think that's a stupid idea" when someone suggests you stick your hand in a running blender.
Welle, for me, and perhaps for others A=/=B
when A = GMs not giving most sentient monsters usable treasureand B = Sentient creatures turning into cash or carrying huge amounts of useless treasure.
So, other people are stupid because of thing you accuse them of thinking. Wowser! And you don't think that is rude! Or patronising! Blimey! I'm running out of exclamation marks!
See, maybe you should look at how Paizo does it (they're generally regarded as being pretty good at this stuff). Why not look at the example I cited earlier from Rise of the Runelords (a good example, I think, as it has gone through development twice) and then you'll see that they do it differently to how you think.
Perhaps it is short-sighted, blinkered and unimaginative... some might even call it stupid... to think that the treasure connected with overcoming an encounter must be in the possession of the creatures in the encounter.
Maybe you can defeat a dozen ogres, two trolls and a scrag and only one of them is carrying a magic item... and then later on in the adventure you recover treasure from another unguarded location instead.
Maybe some of us can do things like that? Maybe the reward from the king is worth more than all of the creatures' combined treasure value? Maybe the rescued NPCs drop a bag of ioun stones on the party as thanks... maybe, just maybe, you might accept that there are more solutions to a problem than the one you prefer.
They don't even have to be 'superior' to your solution, just equally valid for other styles of play and GMing.
And then they stop being stupid, and suddenly the absolute condescension of your accusation might be plain for all to see.
And then a little contrition and humility might be called for.
Or perhaps I am just being stupid.
To be honest, I was raised to think that calling people stupid was usually pretty rude even when they were being stupid. If you told me to set my hair on fire I'd probably say: "No thanks, probably not a great idea, I quite like my hair."
I think it's usually called good manners.
Okay, now I get it. NO I do not think a naked dragon is worth its CR. A CR 19 Ancient Red Dragon isn't squat compared to a shoggoth in terms of party killing potential. At best it's a brute with 15 level sorcerer casting. Strait out of the book minus their triple treasure value, I don't see a them being more than CR 18. It's a dragon. It has that going for it. I imagine it would use its best tricks to the best of its abilities, but frankly the sucker would be dismantled without much effort by a 19th level party. His breath weapon is not very fearsome, his dispels are weaksauce, his attack routine is good but requires him to be ground-zero and not moving and that makes him a target (and your garden variety 19th level martial could tank him quite a few rounds anyway), and the save DCs for his spells are rather low (even a with a +5 base, +5 resistance, and +0 ability, you'll have about a 55% chance of saving against them).
A friend of mine would object that a simple Antimagic Field would allow the Dragon to dominate any kind of party (well, probably excluding Gating a Solar anyway, which would still have a hard time hitting the beast with more than 1-2 attacks without magic anyway, all despite still having +4 CR on the creature).
And I strongly disagree with him (or rather, I agree IF we allow the spell to work in that way)
Back OT (and related to the infos above): a Solar has a +5 to hit and a +5 to AC due to the magic items listed in his Teasure entry; remove them and he suddenly would have a hard time hitting and damaging a CR 19 Dragon even when not Power Attacking (+30/+25/+20/+15 for 3d6+13 against AC 38) and be easily hit (AC 39 against 6 attacks at +35 or +33 for a similar damage output - but only due to Epic DR in use).
So yes, I believe that the treasure of a creature is part of its CR, and should be used/equipped accordigly.
Below a quote from Monster Advancement :
"A monster with class levels always possesses treasure equal to an NPC of a level equal to the monster's final CR (as calculated in Step 3, below). To determine the value of this gear, use the value listed for a heroic NPC of that level, as listed in Table: NPC Gear. Once a total GP value is determined, follow the rules for outfitting an NPC as outlined in that section. Gear should help a monster with class levels remain challenging and retain statistics close to those presented on Table 1-1: Monster Statistics by CR."
I have been wondering about one thing :
In the case of a medusa, a CR 7 creature that gets double treasure, upgraded to CR 11 for class levels, she gets gear/treasure value equal to that of an 11th level NPC. Should she not get additional treasure equal to a CR 7 creature, since that is what additional treasure she usually gets ?
I do assume treasure to be part of a creature's CR, and the way it uses that gear part of her intelligence among other things, though I don't believe a GM should strive for a level of optimization that goes beyond your players.
This is another post that got glossed over in the feeding frenzy. I'm also interested in what people think about the example medusa. Does she get 11th level NPC wealth only? Double the 11th level NPC wealth? 11th level NPC wealth + additional CR7 monster treasure value?
??
Back OT (and related to the infos above): a Solar has a +5 to hit and a +5 to AC due to the magic items listed in his Teasure entry; remove them and he suddenly would have a hard time hitting and damaging a CR 19 Dragon even when not Power Attacking (+30/+25/+20/+15 for 3d6+13 against AC 38) and be easily hit (AC 39 against 6 attacks at +35 or +33 for a similar damage output - but only due to Epic DR in use).
So yes, I believe that the treasure of a creature is part of its CR, and should be used/equipped accordigly.
Keep in mind that the items in question are aalready included in the statblock. The discussion comes from whether or not you should add more stuff to said creature in order to deal with silly questions of where and why this thing is apparently keeping that much stuff.
And honestly there is a point to it. However I understand that monsters are built to the CR they are given without said equipment. And while you can give them equipment that can be use without significantly altering their CR chances are you have changed the CR for better or worse and needs to be looked at.
At higher levels more equipment won't make much difference. Our friend the Solar here doesn't get much better with the inclusion of more stuff. Unless of course you give him a bunch of metamagic rods and update his spell list to be much more effective. Then things are trickier.
Keep in mind that the items in question are aalready included in the statblock. The discussion comes from whether or not you should add more stuff to said creature in order to deal with silly questions of where and why this thing is apparently keeping that much stuff.
This is true, but they are not only included in the stat list, they are mentioned among the treasures of the creature itself:
"Treasure: Double (+5 Full Plate, +5 Dancing Greatsword, +5 Composite Longbow [+9 Str bonus])"
If they can (and indeed, they do) use part of their Treasure for fighting, what should prevent them to use other portions of their wealth as well ?
Keep in mind that the items in question are aalready included in the statblock. The discussion comes from whether or not you should add more stuff to said creature in order to deal with silly questions of where and why this thing is apparently keeping that much stuff.
This is true, but they are not only included in the stat list, they are mentioned among the treasures of the creature itself:
"Treasure: Double (+5 Full Plate, +5 Dancing Greatsword, +5 Composite Longbow [+9 Str bonus])"
If they can (and indeed, they do) use part of their Treasure for fighting, what should prevent them to use other portions of their wealth as well ?
Nothing. That was never the argument. The argument is that it would adjust their CR.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The thing about the argument that it would adjust their CR, is, ok sure, now how much? And of course we don't have to look far to find a guideline as to how much, because we know that giving the creature PC WBL would be +1 CR.
Of course the entire value of the treasure is nowhere near equivalent PC WBL which brings us right back to no, it wouldn't adjust the CR.
Or expressed a different way, yes, it would adjust the CR by 0.
So once again, GM's, just don't be dicks, do what makes sense. This whole piece of advice is here to spice up your game, not to help you screw your PC's.
Hopefully people who are playing together can trust each other a bit right? Play games with your friends, not your enemies and everything should be fine.
I think that's mostly in line with what JJ said. Go ahead and have the creatures use some of their treasure items, it won't change the CR, just be reasonable about it, and if you really want to do something gross with the particular monster.. go all the way and give it some class levels or templates or something, adjust its CR accordingly, and have it be something memorable.
Disagree with me or tark?
I qualified my statement a few posts down.
|
|
The thing about the argument that it would adjust their CR, is, ok sure, now how much? And of course we don't have to look far to find a guideline as to how much, because we know that giving the creature PC WBL would be +1 CR.
Of course the entire value of the treasure is nowhere near equivalent PC WBL which brings us right back to no, it wouldn't adjust the CR.
Or expressed a different way, yes, it would adjust the CR by 0.
So once again, GM's, just don't be dicks, do what makes sense. This whole piece of advice is here to spice up your game, not to help you screw your PC's.
Hopefully people who are playing together can trust each other a bit right? Play games with your friends, not your enemies and everything should be fine.
And here we disagree, as it depends on what you are adding.
If you give a group of land based creatures fly potions, it doesn't add much wealth but if certainly changes the encounter.
Context matters, and while it isn't wrongbadfun to add unique items for use beyond book, it can change things significantly.
Much like Jazz, GM improv can be better than the original music.
It can also be crap.
When you change things, it changes things. To say otherwise is just silly.
What you are saying makes perfect sense, I just can't find any support for it in the rules. Neither could James Jacobs if I read his post correctly. He basically just said, try not to be cheesy about it and you'll be fine.
"When you change things, it changes things. To say otherwise is just silly."
Ok but how much? In this case, as far as I can tell, the rules say not enough to register at all in the CR rating.
"When you change things, it changes things. To say otherwise is just silly."
Ok but how much? In this case, as far as I can tell, the rules say not enough to register at all in the CR rating.
Use common sense? Like you should be with any encounter?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the rules were glaringly at odds with my common sense, I would put common sense before the rule. But in this case the rule doesn't bother me too much. It's not perfect but I can't think of anything better so I'll just go with it.
What's common sense to me might be different then what's common sense to you, but it's all I have available to me. It just doesn't match up with yours, which is ok.
This whole CR system idea put me off quite a bit when I first heard about it, since common sense was always all I needed in AD&D. But now I've gotten use to it and I kind of like it. It makes things less subjective. People with better minds for design then I will ever have already did a ton of work for me. And according to the work they did, it looks like a creatures CR doesn't go up when it uses items out of its treasure.
That's all this thread has been about for me. I enjoy equipping my creatures with gear from their own treasure. It's a new habit of mine I picked up from Ashiel. I like what it adds to my games. It keeps things surprising, challenging and variable. Of course this practice begs the question, should I change the CR? It looks like the rules say no. My experience at the table also says no. So I'm a happy camper.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Like someone else said, it's not as though this is the most original idea in the world or Ashiel is the only one who ever thought of it. It looks like plenty of folks have been doing it this way all along without giving it a second thought. I just hadn't thought of it, and a post by Ashiel happened to be where I encountered the idea. So I tried it and I like it, and everything's fine.
None of this should be threatening or upsetting to anyone, I'm not saying if your creature has no treasure except coins and gems you must be doing something wrong.
|
|
"When you change things, it changes things. To say otherwise is just silly."
Ok but how much? In this case, as far as I can tell, the rules say not enough to register at all in the CR rating.
Having your entire attacked while they sleep would change the difficulty of the encounter as well.
You can't argue both sides of the fence by saying "I can't find a rule to make the CR higher so I don't have to" while at the same time arguing "There is no rule saying I can't add to what is listed in the entry."
Citing omission for permission is weak sauce.
I'm not saying every item change effects CR, particularly when CR isn't exactly a precise number to start with. And I wouldn't want a rule system that anal retentive.
What I am saying is that arguing it changes nothing about difficulty the encounter is as absurd as saying terrain has no effect on the encounter.
|
|
Like someone else said, it's not as though this is the most original idea in the world or Ashiel is the only one who ever thought of it. It looks like plenty of folks have been doing it this way all along without giving it a second thought. I just hadn't thought of it, and a post by Ashiel happened to be where I encountered the idea. So I tried it and I like it, and everything's fine.
None of this should be threatening or upsetting to anyone, I'm not saying if your creature has no treasure except coins and gems you must be doing something wrong.
The OP left out a lot of context in the debate that was going on in the other thread.
It became "Schrodinger's Bestiary" to fit arguments so they could be right in an unrelated argument. Wraith can link to it if he remembers, I just recall it being about how some class or another was useless because of armored dragons or something.
No I'm saying, I can find a rule where gear makes CR higher. Giving the creature a PC WBL array of gear adds +1 to CR. I'm not into the omission thing either most of the time.
I think of having npcs use non combat gear they may have be another example of making the game feel more real. If you give the enemy masterwork manacles for example have them on the prisoner you rescue. I think incidental means the monster doesn't use it though you just find it near the lair.
|
|
No I'm saying, I can find a rule where gear makes CR higher. Giving the creature a PC WBL array of gear adds +1 to CR. I'm not into the omission thing either most of the time.
There is no rule saying you can take the random treasure reward listed and make up gear that isn't in the description and have the creature use it either.
But the argument seems to be that we allow common sense to dictate if they have it they can use it, but ignore common sense that the added equipment will improve the creature's effectiveness.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I can honestly say I have never seen this situation... never.
Every group I have played in used at least some portion of the treasure to EQUIP the evil monster. Well unless it wasn't intelligent in which case the stuff would be found in it's lair. I mean this IS gear the game expects the monster to have why wouldn't they use it if they can?
No not exactly. I'm not ignoring the common sense fact that having the creature use some of its own treasure will make it more effective. I'm just saying that relative to the fact that an entire array of PC WBL gear equals +1 CR, then a few items from its own treasure horde will have to equal less then +1 CR (unless you do something really cheesy with the treasure, like have every penny of it in consumables that the creature uses to nova with). So the CR system doesn't dealt in fine enough minutia for the increased difficulty to register as an increased CR in this case. It's not perfect, but im ok with it.
I can honestly say I have never seen this situation... never.
Every group I have played in used at least some portion of the treasure to EQUIP the evil monster. Well unless it wasn't intelligent in which case the stuff would be found in it's lair. I mean this IS gear the game expects the monster to have why wouldn't they use it if they can?
I guess some people think its obvious to do it this way, others think it will mess up CR.
Me I always did it this way in AD&D before I ever heard of the concept of CR, and when I came to Pathfinder, I guess I thought I wasn't supposed to any more.
Kind of like when you see someone from an older generation and they aren't the most computer savvy, they are overly cautious using the computer because they think they will break it. I was like that.
Now that I'm getting more comfortable with the new mechanics and the idea of balance, I'm less afraid to play around with it and I'm starting to get it to feel like the game I remember again.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What is the point of this thread?
Cause to me it sounds like folk do not know how to advance or give loot to monster.
After you add all the template, class, loot ect you should still check your new madeup advanced monster vs chart 1-1 and 1-2 on page 291 in Bestary 1 to see if it falls in line or if it to storng or to weak. Then adjust the CR as needed.
Also if do not give monster the treaser you put in some other room you weeken it. ie lower the CR. If you put loot on the monster and it make it better the advance the CR. or ie see chart 1-1 on pager 291 in Beastary.
Bottom line is read the whole book not just the stat blocks.
No not exactly. I'm not ignoring the common sense fact that having the creature use some of its own treasure will make it more effective. I'm just saying that relative to the fact that an entire array of PC WBL gear equals +1 CR, then a few items from its own treasure horde will have to equal less then +1 CR (unless you do something really cheesy with the treasure, like have every penny of it in consumables that the creature uses to nova with). So the CR system doesn't dealt in fine enough minutia for the increased difficulty to register as an increased CR in this case. It's not perfect, but im ok with it.
Then check the "Nova verison of the monster and adjust the CR as need see Chart 1-1 in beasary 1 page 291." Cause that is the fight not the pre-buffed verison. If party had chance to do some thing about buffing up then do not adjust the CR.
Yet another one of those things that "isn't really talked about" in the rules. The rules don't explicitly come out and say, "DMs are encouraged to equip monsters with items using the monster's given treasure value, appropriate to the situation. Any combat gear already listed is simply the monster's default equipment and can be adjusted accordingly."
No, that's not in the rules, but it's certainly not unreasonable to use this logic when designing encounters. Monster / NPC treasure and combat gear is ALREADY FACTORED IN to their given CR, so actually adjusting a monster's equipped gear is a great way to alter its difficulty (and RP flavor) without messing with its CR.
The ONLY time a monster / NPC's CR is affected by its gear is when an NPC that is SUPPOSED to have gear has absolutely nothing (CR goes down by 1), or when you increase an NPC's gear value to an amount that a player character would normally have at that level (CR goes up by 1). This is the ONLY time gear changes actually affect CR in the rules (that I know of). Therefore adjusting a monster's actual equipment WITHOUT changing its given total treasure value should NOT affect its CR whatsoever. What matters is the value; not the contents (regarding CR).
Bottom line, adjusting a monster's gear contents is often a good, simple DMing tweak.
Yeah Tom, that's what I would probably do if I really wanted to make that "nova version" monster.
Check out how he looks on table 1-1 after he drinks all his potions or whatever. That's a good idea.
Yet another one of those things that "isn't really talked about" in the rules. The rules don't explicitly come out and say, "DMs are encouraged to equip monsters with items using the monster's given treasure value, appropriate to the situation. Any combat gear already listed is simply the monster's default equipment and can be adjusted accordingly."
No, that's not in the rules, but it's certainly not unreasonable to use this logic when designing encounters. Monster / NPC treasure and combat gear is ALREADY FACTORED IN to their given CR, so actually adjusting a monster's equipped gear is a great way to alter its difficulty (and RP flavor) without messing with its CR.
The ONLY time a monster / NPC's CR is affected by its gear is when an NPC that is SUPPOSED to have gear has absolutely nothing (CR goes down by 1), or when you increase an NPC's gear value to an amount that a player character would normally have at that level (CR goes up by 1). This is the ONLY time gear changes actually affect CR in the rules (that I know of). Therefore adjusting a monster's actual equipment WITHOUT changing its given total treasure value should NOT affect its CR whatsoever. What matters is the value; not the contents (regarding CR).
Bottom line, adjusting a monster's gear contents is often a good, simple DMing tweak.
Pretty much exactly the way I feel about it Sinatar. But I would add something that James Jacobs said on the matter. He said if you really feel the need to come up with something really devious and your really good at building over-powered things, you might want to compare your creatures new stat-block with table 1-1 from the bestiary, and see if you haven't bumped it up to a new CR.
Why would someone adjust CR based on loot the monster already has factored in? Maybe some GMs prefer fast leveling I guess.
We could have used you in here earlier Aranna :)
Anyway from what I understand, some people feel that the loot a monster has is intended strictly for the PC's, and the CR rating of the monster only fits if it restricts itself to only the gear listed in its stat block. Or should I say, "already equipped" in it's stat block. They don't think it should use any of the other treasure it has, unless you want to recalculate the CR, using common sense adjustments.
But I should let them speak for themselves probably, in case I understood them wrong. Glad to see someone else is doing it the way I have been. So this never gave you any noticeable balance problems?
The Marilith? I'm not good with the numbers but that looks like a good example of enough gear, or maybe optimal enough gear, to bump up a CR.
Someone should run it through table 1-1.
|
|
The issue isn't allowing enemies to use what they have, the issue is having the dragon have less gold treasure because you want to give them "X" item, but you don't want to admit "X" item makes them better in combat.
What equipment the enemy has is laid out in the bestiary for monsters.
Non-Monster enemies go off of the NPC wealth, and obviously that includes equipment.
The question is if you take say, the Solar entry as equipped or you reduce the amount of gold/gem/misc treasure and give them more things to fight with.
The stance is you can feel free to have the dragon have a smaller hoard so they can buy something combat useful, but that will make the dragon more difficult than the book dragon.
Which seems really, really obvious so I don't know what the debate is.