Post/Author/DateTime	Post
ajs 02-15-05, 06:23 PM	I searched the stickies and didn't see this question, so let me ask here. A gamer of mine cautioned me that the dire ape was way off in terms of power, and when I looked it up, my quick calculations show its full attack doing around 17.5dpr (average Damage Per Round against AC15). Obviously at level 3, your poor players are going to have an average of 9 (d4) to 25 (d12) hit points and 17.5dpr IS going to kill someone, and AC15 might be light, but even at AC20 it's still 10.6... oh, and that doesn't count its special rend attack for 2d6+9! So my question is two-fold: is the formula used for this published anywhere so that I can tweak it to my needs, and are there any other creatures whose CR is so far off? How do DMs compensate for these? Oops, that was three questions :) My personal approach would be to take the damage per round against normal AC for the level and against the averagage HP for the level and start with that. A fight should do, what... 10% of total HP on average? Of course, that skims over special abilities, feats, etc., but it seems like a better starting point than a 17.5dpr CR3!
Greyman 02-15-05, 07:16 PM	A dire ape is indeed a frightening foe for a lone level 3 character, and such a character is best advised to flee the scene. However, a properly equiped party of four can handle it using standard tank and support tactics. Fall back and let the heavy armor take the brunk. Use buffing and healing spells on that tank, while sniping at the ape with spells and ranged attacks. Finally, when it's hit points been reduced, tumble in, flank, and sneak attack.
11d7 02-15-05, 07:29 PM	Greyman, that woun't work. I've only ever seen a level 3 party beat a Dire Ape when the party was all caster and they all used Scorching ray on it till it dropped from horse back.
ajs 02-15-05, 08:41 PM	Ok, let me take a step back, since I was obviously not clear. First of all, thank you for your replies. I appreciate it, but I seem to have mislead you down a different path than the question I was trying to ask. Not looking to start a tactics discussion at all. I understand that a well equipped party of 4 could take out a DA. No question at all there. My question was this: when so many other CR3 creatures (and most CR4) are so much less overwhelmingly powerful vs a group of 4 level-3 characters, what does CR3 mean and why is it being used as a benchmark. I read the recent article in which WoTC was saying that CRs can vary based on party preparedness and/or the approprietness of their gear, but in this case it's just a matter of 90% of CR3 creatures being pushovers by comparison, and the DM who isn't exactly clued in could easily think, "well, I'll just throw in this one even-EL encounter between an easy and a hard one," without realizing that he's spelling the party's doom. Does no one know what formula WoTC is using? I am putting together a creature-metric tool on my own which may not match CRs, but at least it's going to give you simple numbers that you can compare (like dpr15, dpr20, etc. and other metrics that measure non-pure damage elements). If someone can help me out by producing something close to the CR formula, then I'll add it in. When it's stable enough, I'll offer it for download.
cwslyclgh 02-15-05, 08:56 PM	to beat a dire ape the key is to never let it make a full attack... even if that means that your party never gets to make a full attack against it (at level 3 not making a full attack is not a loss).... what makes the dire ape a killer is the rend ability... if you do not let it use the rend ability by not going toe to toe with it you have a much better chance of winning... note that this is the exact same tactic that a party of average level equal to a creatures CR should use when ever they are fighting a creature with Rend.... other wise rend will shred the PC's hanging in there toe to toe. Does no one know what formula WoTC is using? WotC doesn't use a formula, or so they tell us. the formula I use to get a base CR for monsters I create (which I then tweek through playtesting) is average HP/4.5 plus 1 or 2 for each special ability that effects combat, +2 if AC is over 20, then I divide that number by 3 to get the guestimated CR... I have found that it is fairly accurate for most creatures, often with in 1 of the final CR that I give it... creatures with massive amounts of HP but few special abilities, or creatures with few HP and many special abilities can throw it off however. hope that helps.
ajs 02-15-05, 09:38 PM	to beat a dire ape the key is to never let it make a full attack... even if that means that your party never gets to make a full attack against it (at level 3 not making a full attack is not a loss).... what makes the dire ape a killer is the rend ability Actually, I was ignoring rend. With: 2 claws +8 melee (1d6+6) and bite +3 melee (1d8+3) The DA puts out 17.5 damage every round on average against an AC15 PC. Let's compare that to other CR3s: Animated Object, Large (CR3): Slam +5 melee (1d8+4) = 4.9dpr vs AC15 Ankheg (CR3): Bite +7 melee (2d6+7 plus 1d4 acid) = 11.3dpr vs AC15 Juvenile Arrowhawk (CR3): Electricity ray +9 ranged touch (2d6) = 5.5dpr vs AC15 And so on... It seems that the animals just have an overwhelmingly higher damage output (it's the same for the non-dire bears, etc.), and I'm having a hard time as a GM figuring out how I should be using them. In a way, it's kind of harsh on the players to send them in to battle an easy CR4 and then nearly kill one of them on a CR3 wild animal that they get far less xp for. Of course, I can just avoid using the animals, but that too seems a bit out-of-balance. Hmmm... going to have to come up with a CR formula, I see.....
Lina_Inverse 02-15-05, 09:38 PM	does it have ranged weapons?no. pull out the bows. but beyond which,its an animal.outsmart it.
Greyman 02-16-05, 02:27 AM	Greyman, that woun't work. I've only ever seen a level 3 party beat a Dire Ape when the party was all caster and they all used Scorching ray on it till it dropped from horse back.If they are all casters, ranged spells are indeed the best option. But melee characters at that level can take one on, though it's best if they have healing and buff support (either from teammates or items). The trick, as noted above, is to avoid ever letting it rend anyone. The tank's role is to stay mobile but keep it's attention focused away from soft targets. Though that 10' reach can make this a might tricky, taking attacks of opportunity are always preferable to being rended.
argorond 02-16-05, 06:54 AM	Ajs the reason why animals crs are so low is because they are stupid and they should be played with that intelligence in mind.
Ogre4Hire 02-16-05, 01:52 PM	Wow, that was an uninformed post. I take it you've never watched a pack of wolves or a pod of Orcas in action. They're anything but stupid in their use of stratigies that allow them to take down creatures that are much larger and more powerful than they are. A Dire Ape is relatively easy to beat, with its low AC and poor HP. The easiest way to beat it is to wear it down with ranged attack before it can close, and use Power Attack to inflict as much damage as possible once it gets up to you. Attacking and falling back (even taking the AoO) is usually the best stratigy, since the Rend attack is almost always going to be lethal.
Evadyn the second 02-16-05, 04:02 PM	The beast is strong but not that strong. My players have beaten a dire ape and his two comrades(narmall apes) and they were all level 3, 1 melee, 1 ranged, 1 caster. No problem.
Andrew_980 02-16-05, 09:22 PM	the problem with dire apes is when you have a group of 4 with only one melee type gets 4 dire apes summoned ontop of them, as happened to me in a modual last weekend. the DM saw how wrong it was and sent us help. and this was about 2 minutes, in game time, from a fight with 4 3rd level warriors.
ajs 02-17-05, 11:13 AM	So this has lead me down the path of attempting to reverse-engineer CRs. I'm sure others have done the same, so I'm interested in hearing how you weigh the various factors. I'm working on pure damage right now (given full-attack, how much damage does the creature do per round on average), which is actually more complex than it sounds, but doable. Next up will be balancing that against spell use and special spell-like abilities. Finally, I'll be factoring in how much damage the monster can take and how fast it is going to take it from the average PC. The trick is to find a formula the semi-reliably tells you that a creature can dish out about 1/8-1/4 of a group's hit points in about the amount of time that the group can take the monster down. This will also aid me in developing a better model for establishing not just the monster's CR, but the party's level as well. Simply averaging party level works fine when you have 4 players, but how unsafe is any given creature if you only have 3? What about 10? What's a real challenge for a party of 10 fighters? 10 monks? Evenly balanced party of 6? I'll post my findings.
Phantom Lord 02-17-05, 11:53 AM	I am surprised nobody stated the obvious here: it was stated that fighting the Dire Ape as a group of 3rd level adventurers requires special tactics, namely to keep you feet moving and avoid giving it a full attack. Well, where does this knowledge come from? Is it innate, an inborn wisdom that all characters should have? Or is it a fact that is widely spread throughout the world? Probably not. Fact is, if a battle requires special knowledge to beat, and the characters do not have a reasonable in-game way to obtain that knowledge, the battle is too hard. Sure, they might find out that they need to stay away from the dire ape so it cannot rend. By then it's too late, and one of the party is dead. Not really fair. I would say (never having used a dire ape IMC, or faced one as a player) that from the description it should be at least a CR 4, maybe even a 5.
Lord_Naerik 02-17-05, 12:31 PM	Even the most dull witted adventurer should know that the best way to fight an animal that is bigger and stronger than you is to stay mobile and use ranged attacks. Anyone who tries to slug it out with King Kong deserves exactly what happens to them.
Ogre4Hire 02-17-05, 12:34 PM	Maybe a CR 4. No freakin' way is it a CR 5 (once the party has access to 3rd level magic, it simply becomes a very weak creature). And about the Metagaming: it really isn't metagaming to have your character look at an animal and realize that it can probably make 3 attack/round compared to your 1 and decide that Shoot N Scoot is a better idea than a slugfest. Or you could have my Fighter-Ranger who's got a huge Knowledge: Nature bonus who took one look at the attacking Dire Ape and instantly realized what it was and what it would do to a person if it manage to hit with both claws.
Nuntius128 02-17-05, 12:57 PM	The only reason its CR is so low is because all it really has going for it, compared to anything else, is its high Strength. Of course it'll do lots of damage, its Large sized, and has really high Str compared to a party of level 3 characters. But, it has no magical abilities, or the like. It just hits hard.
cwslyclgh 02-17-05, 01:13 PM	In all honesty average damage per round is pretty low on the list of things that WotC (or the third party companies, we are talking nearly all professional "monster makers") consider when assigning CR. also if you are doing average damage per round calculations you would need to do it based upon the AC of an average Player Character, the stock NPC's in the monster manual are not good examples for this because they were only aloted NPC wealth by level, which is much different then the PC wealth by level table (Especialy at higher level). 3rd level PC tanks should have at least AC 20 (full plate and heavy shield) under the standard rules (Which assume that the characters will beable to buy what ever they want) and quite possibly a bit higher. (actually in this case the NPC fighter works out okay, simply because at 3rd level the difference between the two average wealth by level tables is at its lowest only 200 gp appart... the NPC fighter in the DMG has an AC 21 at 3rd level)
LukiLoki 02-17-05, 02:02 PM	So this has lead me down the path of attempting to reverse-engineer CRs. I'm sure others have done the same, so I'm interested in hearing how you weigh the various factors. I'm working on pure damage right now (given full-attack, how much damage does the creature do per round on average), which is actually more complex than it sounds, but doable. Next up will be balancing that against spell use and special spell-like abilities. Finally, I'll be factoring in how much damage the monster can take and how fast it is going to take it from the average PC. The trick is to find a formula the semi-reliably tells you that a creature can dish out about 1/8-1/4 of a group's hit points in about the amount of time that the group can take the monster down. This will also aid me in developing a better model for establishing not just the monster's CR, but the party's level as well. Simply averaging party level works fine when you have 4 players, but how unsafe is any given creature if you only have 3? What about 10? What's a real challenge for a party of 10 fighters? 10 monks? Evenly balanced party of 6? I'll post my findings. You're looking for a shortcut to playtesting, but I don't think you're going to come up with one that will work across the board (i.e. for all CR's, party levels, sizes, and compositions). The argument above, that, if you have to use any sort of tactics to defeat a creature at CR=Party Level, then the CR must be too low, is bogus. It's why WotC doesn't, and can't, and shouldn't try to, have an airtight formula for CR's based on a version of the analysis that ajs is attempting here. Different creatures are going to be more or less effective against groups with different tactics and compositions. It's why CR, itself, is a guideline, and why the DM is urged to adjust Experience Awards for greater difficulty based on terrain advantages, superior tactics, or even a "mismatch" between the strengths of a given creature and a given party. It may seem like CR is a mechanic designed for "plug and play" interchangeability, but, as this discussion makes clear, it isn't, and so a DM who doesn't do at least a little elementary analysis of the creature's strengths versus his PC's weaknesses and vice versa, is in for some unpleasant surprises.
ajs 02-17-05, 02:16 PM	In all honesty average damage per round is pretty low on the list of things that WotC (or the third party companies, we are talking nearly all professional "monster makers") consider when assigning CR. Ah... why? A dire ape is either going to attack or run away... there's not much else it can do. If it attacks, then its average damage per round (given and recieved) will determine its threat level. Am I missing something there? Certainly AC, saves, etc. need to be factored in also. You basically have: how long can it live against players of any given level and how much damage can it do in that time. Now special cases are, of course, special. For example, creatures that are weak, but are likely to destroy equipment or act through subterfuge. also if you are doing average damage per round calculations you would need to do it based upon the AC of an average Player Character Well, yes. Of course. That's why I said that it's not as easy as it sounds. The formula for a basic strike with no crits or damage reduction is: ((attack+21)/20-AC/20) * avgdmg (not counting the fact that there's no such thing as negative damage) so AC is clearly in there. I've factored it out the way I have so that you can easily compare different ACs to different attacks. The final formula (which will be in a program, not free-form like this) will take a standard progression in equipment as extrapolated from the DMG and project out the average AC for each level. the stock NPC's in the monster manual are not good examples for this because they were only aloted NPC wealth by level, which is much different then the PC wealth by level table (Especialy at higher level). 3rd level PC tanks should have at least AC 20 (full plate and heavy shield) under the standard rules (Which assume that the characters will beable to buy what ever they want) Again, this seems fairly obvious, though you are assuming that the party is able to get the creature to focus on a tankish character, which might not be a good assumtion (e.g. if you assume that that will be difficult, then the party who CAN do that reliably has an edge over standard CR metrics... arguably as they should).
ajs 02-17-05, 02:33 PM	It may seem like CR is a mechanic designed for "plug and play" interchangeability, but, as this discussion makes clear, it isn't, and so a DM who doesn't do at least a little elementary analysis of the creature's strengths versus his PC's weaknesses and vice versa, is in for some unpleasant surprises. Hmmm... this seems to boil down to: the CR system is not reliable as it stands, so you should not rely on any CR system. Obviously, as it stands, many creatures are over- or under-powered for their CR as listed. Dragons are a classic case, and while WoTC seems to defend this with a "but they're supposed to be powerful" party line, powerful and high-power-for-CR seem to me to be orthoganal concepts, and giving a misleading CR doesn't actually mean that the creature is any tougher. Ultimately, the CR system gives newer DMs a false sense of hope. It presents a system by which they can easily determine that a creature is a "challenge" or "easy" or "average" with respect to the party's power. The DMG even suggests going up a CR or two to introduce a strong challenge. Well, let me tell you, if I took that advice and dropped my average level 2 party into a room with a dire ape, I'd be looking for some scrap paper for them to write their new character's stat rolls on! Now, I don't mean to be hostile here. I do want to see what ideas others have, but if the only solution is "you cant' trust CRs, so play-test every encounter" or "just get used to all of the creatures until you have a feel for where the CRs are wrong"... well, I think I'll develop a CR generator.... My first session using 3.5 (old 1st ed hack, here), I was stunned by how easy the encounters were, but in reviewing that was mostly the result of choice of creature. Some CR2 creatures I chose as a challenge are pushovers, where there are some CR1 creatures that would have been a hard fight.
LukiLoki 02-17-05, 03:38 PM	Hmmm... this seems to boil down to: the CR system is not reliable as it stands, so you should not rely on any CR system. I'm not saying it's not reliable, I'm saying that it isn't (and IMO shouldn't try to be) as robust as you want it to be. It's reliable as a gross metric, with a margin of error that has to be built in because of the great variability in abilities and tactical options available to the PCs. You shouldn't rely on it blindly is what I'm saying. Ultimately, the CR system gives newer DMs a false sense of hope. It presents a system by which they can easily determine that a creature is a "challenge" or "easy" or "average" with respect to the party's power. The DMG even suggests going up a CR or two to introduce a strong challenge. Well, let me tell you, if I took that advice and dropped my average level 2 party into a room with a dire ape, I'd be looking for some scrap paper for them to write their new character's stat rolls on! I think what it does is provides relatively firm guidelines for awarding experience for challenges overcome. Asking it to do more is asking for trouble, as the example of the Dire Ape makes plain. Now, I don't mean to be hostile here. I do want to see what ideas others have, but if the only solution is "you cant' trust CRs, so play-test every encounter" or "just get used to all of the creatures until you have a feel for where the CRs are wrong"... well, I think I'll develop a CR generator.... You don't seem hostile to me, so no worries. In respone, however, I really don't think you need to playtest every encounter. I do think a little "feel" is necessary, including a good understanding of an individual party's capabilities and weaknesses, without which your CR generator won't really help in the sense that it won't act as a substitute for good judgement, which, you are entirely correct in pointing out, a new DM can't be expected to magically acquire without experience. But, hey, it's a complex game. It has a learning curve and everybody's got to start somewhere.
ajs 02-17-05, 04:10 PM	I'm not saying it's not reliable, I'm saying that it isn't (and IMO shouldn't try to be) as robust as you want it to be. Fair enough. I'll keep working on this, and perhaps in the end, I'll agree. Until then... hey, at least it keeps me off the streets ;-) your CR generator won't really help in the sense that it won't act as a substitute for good judgement, which, you are entirely correct in pointing out, a new DM can't be expected to magically acquire without experience. Yes, true. My goal is to get something in place where I can generate a CR for a given writeup that tells me "creature foo is roughly as powerful as party bar", not "party bar is guaranteed to win in a fight against foo by a factor of 75%". The latter is, as you point out, unreasonable to expect. I do think, however, that a saner CR system than the default could be generated that would aid the DM like myself (old timer who doesn't know 3.5) or the true newbie in avoiding simple mistakes (like throwing a party of 2nd level folks in with a dire ape as a mild challenge rather than as a nail-biting encounter that the party might have to flee from). Thanks for the input. I'll let you know what I come up with!
LukiLoki 02-17-05, 04:29 PM	Yeah, I can see the value of such a system as kind of a diagnostic for "troubleshooting" the CR system, rather than a replacement for it. I'll be interested to see what you come up with, and I'd be happy to try it out in my game too and see if it's a good predictor of situations where the CR is questionable. My thinking being that it might be nice to know how it works across different parties and encounters than the ones you might run to test it. (I'm running a 10th level game right now.)
Slagger the Chuul 02-17-05, 10:04 PM	One of the difficulties with designing a useful CR calculator is determining the synergistic effects of all a creature's abilities. Individually, it's relatively easy to determine the approximate power of a given feature, but when you include the other tricks the creature has at its disposal you need to determine the benefits of the relationship between the two. For example, the ever-lovable Chuul has the ability to grab people, which combines fairly simply with the ability to paralyze those victims; a simple enough extension of the grabbing. But another thing the Chuul has is that it's a natively aquatic creature, so if you're fighting it, you could end up being paralyzed underwater. This gives the Chuul a minor ability to drown people which is listed nowhere in its statistics, but gains deadly importance if a party members is snatched and the PCs need to engage in an underwater chase before the victim suffocates.
Keenath 02-18-05, 11:36 AM	Part of the problem is that WotC wrote the CR system with the idea that some creatures are "boss" creatures, much tougher than normal for their CR. Dragons, Dire Apes, and a few others fall into this category. The trouble is, nobody bothered to let us players know which are which! The CR system shouldn't be weighted. If I WANT a boss monster, we can probably assume I know enough to pull a creature with a CR 2 or 3 higher than the party level. Seriously, who came up with this bizarre plan? 3.5 did some work to fix that, and go to a straight scalar CR system, but they obviously missed a couple monsters when they did that. Based on its abilities, the Dire Ape should probably be a CR 5 creature.
Ogre4Hire 02-18-05, 12:08 PM	You're kidding, right? I've got a 5th level fighter who could go 1 on 1 with the Killer Monkey and rip the living :censored: out of it 9 times out of 10 by himself. And he's got about half the average GP worth of equipment for a PC of his level (using the table in the DMG). Against a party of 4 5th level characters who are at full power, ol' Donkey Kong is goin' down if the first round with no significant injury to any of the party members.
eggplantm 02-18-05, 12:27 PM	One reason the dire ape has a CR that seems low when compared to your other three examples (Arrowhawk, Animated Object and Ankheg) is that it has no special defenses or abilities (which the other three do). All it has is its strong melee attacks. Also, if I remember, its AC is kinda low. Special defenses and attacks tend to up the CR a bit. They say there is no formula, but I suspect to say there is no "exact" formula is more accurate. There are many creatures that seem quite tough and can crank out the damage in a hurry, almost unbelievably so, but don't have a very high CR. Giants are a good example. The reasoning seems to be that because they have no special defenses or attacks, they don't rank the same as creatures that have some of these abilities or defenses. Also, the people at wotc give very high precedence to certain attacks to jump up a creature's CR. Poison, Disease, Energy Resistance, spell resistance, Regeneration, Spell like abilities and a couple others will jack up the monster's CR by one or more easy. Even if it doesn't really help the monster that much. I don't think the dire ape's CR is too low. He's probably a CR 3 but he just might be the toughest damn 3 you can walk into. Somebody has to be it.
eRaz0r 02-18-05, 01:27 PM	The Dire Ape is often less dangerous than the Ankheg. The Ankheg often attacks with surprise, bursting from the ground when prey walks by. It has improved grab. Combat often goes like this : Surprise round - Ankheg bursts from ground and attacks a flatfooted party member. IT does 2d6+7 damage +1d4 Acid damage and grapples the PC as a free action. One party member is now usually useless (It's got a +12 grapple modifier, which is nearly impossible to beat at 3rd level for anyone but Half-Orc Barbarians). It will continue to munch on that PC until it takes damage, after which it retreats back to its burrow at full speed, meaning the party has to run after it in the dark earth where it has even more of an advantage. If it's cornered or frustrated, it can spit out 4d4 Acid in a line (once every 6hrs) Ref 14 for half. How is the dire ape worse than that ? Sure it can do lots of damage on a full attack, but any grapple attempt it makes can be foiled by the corresponding AoO, and with AC15, that's going to be quite often. It has no special means of getting a surprise round, and it's single attack (the claw) is less damaging (1d6+6) than the Ankheg's bite (2d6+7). It has 3 less AC than the Ankheg, and only 7 more HP (on average). It's got reach, and is a little faster -and that makes it very dangerous, of course, but not so much more than the ankheg as to be worth another level of CR.
Azigoth 02-22-05, 03:22 PM	After some extensive research, particularly the infamous "Dire Apes pwn all" thread on *that other* forum, I came across a very authoritarian formula put forth by a game-sage that convinced me that the D.A. is "appropriately costed" as the poster wrote and the CR formula WotC uses for dire animals in general is actually too conservative. Dire Apes have major weaknesses - remember, in Weekend Vittles Mordy killed one with a low-grade lightning bolt in the back. Everyone knows the CR system is not perfect - thank god all CR 1 monsters are not of identical power in all situations and terrains. Honestly, I trust the game designers to balance that stuff out a lot better than I trust most consumers.
cwslyclgh 02-22-05, 06:17 PM	After some extensive research, particularly the infamous "Dire Apes pwn all" thread on *that other* forum what other forum would that be? Enworld? Nifty? Monte Cooks Boards? SKR's Boards?... there are so many "Other" forums out there that your response above is of very little help overall.
Deckyon 02-24-05, 07:48 PM	Do a search. I am sure weekend vitals shows up somewhere...