In 3e, what are appropriate stats per CR?

[Crissa]

In 3e, what are appropriate stats per CR?

Like, for CR 1, what would be a good AC to change a Fighter to a CR 1 challenge?

-Crissa

[name_here]

That's actually a pretty hard question to answer. Or, more accurately, it's not an answerable question, because a given CR doesn't have set stats. it simply must be appropriately effective against a party of the same level.

[Talisman]

This is why I ignore CR for the most part. I look at what my party is capable of and pick critters based on that. So, if the main melee types have, say, a +10 to hit, I go with an AC in the high teens - low 20s, and maybe mid-20s for the tank-monsters.

It depends heavily on the composition of the party and the optomization power of the players.

[ZER0]

For some things it's more difficult than others, but for the first few levels, I've always found it fairly simple.

First we take the elite array, because that is "normal" stat array for PC's (and what I use for playtesting).

15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8

I put normal in quotations because in truth I've always found that point-buy is easier, and under a normal 25 point-buy, there is invariably a 16 in there somewhere.

Now where was I? Right. Stats.

So, for first level, our two highest stats have a +2 modifier. I think the idea is that people who play a certain role in that party will put that stat in a particular place; a Barbarian would have a +2 to Strength, and a Wizard would have a +2 to Int, etc.

Now we take the Barbarian's to-hit (+1 BAB, +2 Str, +3 total) and so our average hit is 13.5. On the spellcaster scale, the Save DC for a level 1 spell is 13. An average CR 1 encounter is, say, two Orcs. They have an AC of 13, and their one good save is +3. So, basically, what we're looking at for first level is the elite array, and it's (fairly) functional.

At second level we see no change, and then at third, the possibility of a Magic Item occurs (I'm going BoG on this one). Whether it's the Spectacles of Intellect to bring your DC's up one (and another one from a new spell level) or the Sword of Hurting things to increase attack and damage (and extra to-hit from BAB), what we're essentially doing to this point is increasing things by one per level.

At fourth level things go up again, because of the stat boost and the magic item increase going up, as well as the possibility of a second magic item. It's after this point that I haven't bothered to keep calculating. I think it's safe to say, however, that starting with the Elite Array is a good way to make an appropriately balanced character. You can do point buy (which I prefer as a character optimiser) in which case 25 is actually appropriate, but rolling stats should never be allowed.

I hope that answers your question adequately.

[baduin]

There is a table for such things in Pathfinder Beta pdf on page 294. I don't know what it is worth, but it is there.

[Roy]

There is a table for such things in Pathfinder Beta pdf on page 294. I don't know what it is worth, but it is there.

I'm going to respond to this with the obligatory PF devs = completely fucking incompetent and therefore an irrelevant and illegitimate source.

I am then going to follow by checking to confirm that my memory is correct.

Let's see here...

Expected HP for CR 20 is 370 and AC is 38. That's about accurate, actually. It's a very rough estimate, granted, but it's actually in line with stuff you'll encounter as the actual averages going by MM1 only is 409.33 HP and 36.44 AC. Of course this is without buffs. Balor and Pit Fiend have Unholy Aura, dragons have various shit, Big T is Big T. Whatever.

Then the Epic Fucking Fail starts.

Acceptable attack modifier ranges are considered to be 22-30... you know, level 12 stock mob material?

Average damage is expected to be 93-125... except, actual CR 20 melee creatures do better.

Their primary ability DC is supposed to be 27. Twenty Mother Fucking Seven. This was level appropriate about 5 levels ago for stock mobs and decently made PC casters. Their secondary ability DC, whatever the fuck that means is supposed to be 20. Seriously, they actually expect the monsters to use shit that is don't roll a 1 material, that was level appropriate about 10-15 levels ago. Then saves are supposed to be 17-22... might as well bend over and start taking it doggy style from the casters now, who have save DCs in the low to mid 30s without trying.

At level 1 you get Epic Fucking Fail like DCs of 11 being appropriate. So... all the casters have Int/Wis/Cha 11 at this level?

It's not just fucked at level 20, but I got tired of making saves vs stupid.

[Crissa]

So a Level 1 melee class should have a +3 or +4 to hit so a guy in plate (+9 AC) or a mounted guy with an untrained horse (double damage) is a CR 1 encounter?

-Crissa

[JonSetanta]

CR is bull.

It's like saying "What's an average Magic deck?"
So many options there's no way you can predict, although restrictions as by level benchmark on powers and HP do help there's so much variance it's just not worth it.

With Magic one can predict possible output as by mana cost but without knowing the entire deck it's just impossible to narrow down.
You'd have to think in terms of chaos theory and fuzzy math.

[Crissa]

That's silly. You have a chance to hit and incapacitate an opponent based upon four defenses. So if you have a one in four chance to do that, you've gotten your equal CR. It has four targets to take out. If it can, reasonably, in the same time four attacks are levied upon it, take out one of the four... You have an equal CR.

Yes, some things are puzzle keys - like insubstantial or immunities or DR - and some are not. Yes, what's a challenge for four random characters may not be a challenge for four of the same character. But you don't plan the base CR by expecting; that gets you fail like the CR for dragons.

Now, not because I know the math exists, but because I know the term exists, I asked some opinions.

Sheesh, sigma.

-Crissa

[Roy]

So a Level 1 melee class should have a +3 or +4 to hit so a guy in plate (+9 AC) or a mounted guy with an untrained horse (double damage) is a CR 1 encounter?

-Crissa

I don't understand how you arrived at this conclusion or how this is a response to my statement or anything else in the thread. Back up a bit.

[CatharzGodfoot]

There is probably an appropriate range of stats for a certain CR, but D&D is so complex that the range is big and it's the interaction that counts.

I mean, you've got things like swarms, ghosts, trolls, manticores, and mind flayers.

However, it should be possible (using reverse character class vs. monster 'acid testing') to find a tighter range in terms of base and combined stats.

If there's a monster that a high-Dex wizard can't hit with a touch attack, that might be your upper range for touch AC. If you've got a monster that goes down in one attack from a monk (ignoring DR and hardness), that might be your absolute minimum for HP. The upper limit on HP is probably boredom, although you usually don't want something to get a level-appropriate attack and suddenly jump 4 CRs.

[Crissa]

I don't understand how you arrived at this conclusion or how this is a response to my statement or anything else in the thread. Back up a bit.

Did you read my first post?

-Crissa

[Roy]

I don't understand how you arrived at this conclusion or how this is a response to my statement or anything else in the thread. Back up a bit.

Did you read my first post?

-Crissa

Yes, but that was 6 days ago. I was thinking of some sort of direct response. A Fighter in plate with a Strength around 16 would likely qualify as CR 1, but only barely so. It quickly falls apart from there though.

[Wulf]

There is a list for such things in the DMG, under creating your own monsters.

target AC = 13+CR and attack = (CR*1.5)+2 , I believe.

So to make a fighter of CR 1, you will need 14 AC. If it is a heavy armored fighter, you can make its AC 16 (shield bonus).

[Gelare]

I had to invent some mooks the other day for my level 12 game. I wanted them to be disposable, so around CR 10 each (since it helps that my players are pretty competent). I came up with a brute that would throw around two attacks at +16 (10 BAB, 4 Strength, 2 Magic) for 1d10+10 (basically winged this one), a blaster that tossed around whatever-subsituted Fireballs for 1d10+30 (much faster than rolling 10d6 every time), and a debuffer that threw around Dispel Magics at +10.

I guess I can't recommend any sort of systematic method, just pick a CR, find out what PCs of that level are supposed to be doing, add +2 or -2 to flavor, and voila.

[Roy]

It just me, or have the last few estimates seriously low balled it?

[Tequila Sunrise]

In 3e, what are appropriate stats per CR?

Like, for CR 1, what would be a good AC to change a Fighter to a CR 1 challenge?

-Crissa

You mean "what stats should a Fighter 1 NPC have?" or "what stats should any given CR 1 monster have?"?

If the first, I'd build your NPC as you would a PC, with a PC's wealth. Then turn most of the NPC's items into innate bonuses and abilities, so you don't overload your PCs with wealth when the NPC dies.

If the second, I'd check out my Manual of Monster Construction, which is a no-BS guide to monster-creation-by-CR that I wrote.

Hope that helps,
TS

[Bigode]

I won't claim expertise enough to try to prove BS on that, but I happen to agree with Roy that previous answers (which includes the MM guidelines) lowball it heavily, and, for example, your best AC surpasses the official by a mere 7 points (not to say +7 AC's little, but not enough if the official was too low as we think it is). Also, including both single attack and full attack damage rows seems to imply everyone making full attacks makes 2 attacks/round, regardless of level.

[Roy]

But seriously. First, take the numbers from the Optimization by the Numbers handbook which averages together MM 1 stuff. Then raise whatever stats are appropriate to the creature type, because averaging everything means a lot of irrelevant crap drags down the average... like some caster monster making the average attack bonus seem lower, when in reality said caster monster either won't melee, or will melee after buffing, neither of which are accounted for by the handbook but both result in a deceptive average.

Then you should probably raise them more, as MM1 creatures are fairly weak.

Not exactly stellar or exactly defined guidelines there, but will at least sidestep the low ball problem that's came up in quite a few places here. So it makes a good starting point.

[Bigode]

Then you should probably raise them more, as MM1 creatures are fairly weak.

Even monsters suffered power creep? Continuously with each MM, or what?

[ubernoob]

But seriously. First, take the numbers from the Optimization by the Numbers handbook which averages together MM 1 stuff. Then raise whatever stats are appropriate to the creature type, because averaging everything means a lot of irrelevant crap drags down the average... like some caster monster making the average attack bonus seem lower, when in reality said caster monster either won't melee, or will melee after buffing, neither of which are accounted for by the handbook but both result in a deceptive average.

Then you should probably raise them more, as MM1 creatures are fairly weak.

Not exactly stellar or exactly defined guidelines there, but will at least sidestep the low ball problem that's came up in quite a few places here. So it makes a good starting point.

This is actually a pretty damn good suggestion. When I build and equip PCs I usually check against those numbers. If I'm not beating them (either with attack roll or save DC) more than 75% of the time then I assume I did something wrong and rebuild until I do hit with my primary at least 75% of the time (because as Roy said those numbers lowball it and I want to stay relevant against enemies that are strong).

[Roy]

Then you should probably raise them more, as MM1 creatures are fairly weak.

Even monsters suffered power creep? Continuously with each MM, or what?

Mostly it's because the first MM has Alertness and Toughness spam everywhere. The second is just throw random numbers at the page, so I make my will save to disbelieve. The third, they finally started making monsters intelligently. Then the fifth is just random templated class leveled crap and the fourth I'm not familiar enough with to comment on.

So your average numbers should be higher, as you are expecting the creature to have feats that actually improve its melee abilities appreciably.

If it's a MM1 dragon or outsider, you're probably ok, but still need to raise it to reflect the bit about not being burdened down by irrelevant shit.

[Bigode]

Mostly it's because the first MM has Alertness and Toughness spam everywhere. The second is just throw random numbers at the page, so I make my will save to disbelieve. The third, they finally started making monsters intelligently. Then the fifth is just random templated class leveled crap and the fourth I'm not familiar enough with to comment on.

Again because while informative, this skipped the most interesting part: MM3 -> MM4, since MM2's 3.0 and MM5 == what you said.

If it's a MM1 dragon or outsider, you're probably ok, but still need to raise it to reflect the bit about not being burdened down by irrelevant shit.

Just to make sure: you mean after raising their CRs, right?

[Roy]

No, I mean they probably have better than average saves, and dragons have better than average attack sequences. Most outsiders are actually pretty weaksauce overall due to their low HD. Dragons are ok, but would become just another trash mob to own for free XP and loot if you raised their CR without raising their stats. So you should raise your baseline to account for the fact that only the relevant data is worth tracking, expected buff sequences, intelligent build...

Then aim higher than the baseline, so you're still relevant against the strong stuff.

[Bigode]

So you should raise your baseline to account for the fact that only the relevant data is worth tracking, expected buff sequences, intelligent build...

First and third true, but as for the second, go ahead and use the actual buffs. Thanks.