Issues With Dungeons&Dragons: A Comprehensive CRT

[Qawsedf234]

But they aren't. They're four to two CR levels lower than Imix. They shouldn't scale if they don't at least match his level for the same reason why we wouldn't scale a default Goblin to be 6-C based on lucky roles.

has their CR shift about

Its one thing to scale a creature edition CR to the same edition. Saying the Empyrean scales to be 6-C is one thing, because in 5e they're CR 23 vs Imix's 19. But trying to back scale 3e characters to lowered 5e CRs is just dishonest in my view.

one thing I can see the Pit Fiend, having a possibly 6-C. As 4e has a pit feind version that is CR 30.

Imix is CR 32 in that edition though. So they still wouldn't scale to him.

 

[Dragonstitch]

that is fair. I did not know how close in CR they had to be to have "At least Low 7-B, possibly 6-C".

 

[Qawsedf234]

If it helps, I think that anyone in 3E above CR 24 should scale to the Low 6-B feat. 21-24 scale to the 6-C feat. 20 gets a possible 6-C rating and 17-19 get an "at least 7-B, likely higher" rating.

In 5e if they're massively above Imix like with the Demigod people then they're unchanged.

That sound acceptable to everyone?

 

[Mr. Bambu]

I can agree to 20 getting possibly 6-C.

So, ratings for the verse based purely on CR go as follows:

CR 1-4: 9-B (Burning Hands)

CR 5-8: 9-A (Fireball)

CR 9-12: High 8-C (Dawn)

CR 13-19: Low 7-B (Legendary Dragons)

CR 20: At least Low 7-B, possibly 6-C (Imix/Elemental Lords)

CR 21+: At least Low 6-B, possibly 6-B (Father Llymic)

 

[Dragonstitch]

that sounds good to me. Also I just remembered I forgot to calc 4e's Burning Hands since it might give a higher rating for CR 1-4.

 

[Qawsedf234]

My thing is that we should iron out when people start scaling epic wise. Considering Elder Evils can like, shock entire planes of existence like with Abominations I think it should go something like

• CR 21-24: 6-C/At least 6-C

• CR 25+: Low 6-B, possibly 6-B

For 3E of course. In 5E where Imix and co. are like 18-20~ then 21+ would be enough to scale to the EEs. If that's acceptable with everyone.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

I find that to be enough. Elder Evils are weird since Father is technically CR 18 when he does the feat but he's also Elder Evil material.

 

[Qawsedf234]

EEs are like, weird in general. So if @Dragonstitch and @Xulrev also agree I'll make the changes to everyone.

 

[Qawsedf234]

Well after the calc is accepted of course.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Right.

Like I said I may be interested in peering at the other Elder Evil signs for feats just because they seem to have tons of the things.

 

[Qawsedf234]

I think most of the good signs involve people who either have better feats or scale to be better. But a second look couldn't hurt.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

My thoughts exactly. Too bad Dendar's star-eating feat was scaleable rather than "when-they-have-enough-nightmares"

 

[Qawsedf234]

I dunno if its a feat for Ubato that he can fight a 4-C Elder Evil or if its a low showing for Dendar's power nullification.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

While we're here, since the book comes with default signs that can be used for an Elder Evil, could we realistically give the abilities to each Evil? For example, the Infestation sign denotes a massive surge in a certain type of creature to essentially destroy the world as the Evil approaches. The Blood Moon leaves everyone in the world in a fury. Etc etc.

Coincidentally, there is this feat:

The sun did not rise. Hours turned into days, days into weeks, and still the blanket of darkness shrouded all. A cruel, dark winter was upon us, freezing the warmth of our blood.
	~ Elder Evils, pg 8​

Instead of the sun disappearing completely, planetary rotation slows so that, ultimately, one side of the world is bathed in perpetual light while the other is plunged into eternal darkness.
	~ Elder Evils, pg 8​

 

[Qawsedf234]

could we realistically give the abilities to each Evil

I don't think so. Those are just some generic signs that can be applied to anything or swapped out. Every EE has a default sign.

Coincidentally, there is this feat:

The first is just a biproduct of Father's winter and the second I've talked about before. Got like, a Tier 5 result or something.

Wait you've actually calced that before. Well anyways its just a possible alternate effect, but "prime" effect is still the freezing of the world.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

True but with the game giving the alternative that'd be 5C

 

[Xulrev]

Wait why are we still accepting Legendary Dragons as scaling when even Qaw accepts the regional effect scaling is pretty bunk? Unless there was another calc??

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Because the discussion was had ages ago and no new evidence has been brought to actually change that discussion.

 

[Xulrev]

I definitely think it's pretty obvious that new evidence was brought forth since Qaw changed his mind entirely on the matter. Simply because YOU haven't been swayed does not mean the argument has not changed, truthfully.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

No, literally no evidence has been brought forward, that's what I'm saying. Qaw disagreed even at the time. However, Azzy, myself, and literally everyone else did agree. No evidence means it doesn't change because opinions remain in the mindset of downplaying a verse.

 

[Dragonstitch]

So unless I messed something up. 4e burning hands would end up pushing CR 1-4 characters to 9-A

 

[Xulrev]

So you're ignoring direct mechanics as explained in the book to overinflate the verses calcs, essentially?

Ignoring the facts doesnt mean they dont exist, thankfully.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

So you're ignoring direct mechanics as explained in the book to overinflate the verses calcs, essentially?
Ignoring the facts doesnt mean they dont exist, thankfully.

No, I'm pointing out that you haven't actually provided new knowledge. The fact that it fades over time was considered at the time and it was decidedly okay to use. I'm pointedly pulling attention to the fact that you haven't said anything new about that particular section, ergo nothing new has to be instituted simply because you disagree with it.

 

[Qawsedf234]

As said before, nust because at one time we agreed to use something does not mean that it's correct or unchangeable. Plenty of things on this site have ratings change or heavily shifted based on new information or a general consensus that the old method was flawed. While I haven't brought up the dragons in awhile that's because I was focusing on the incorrect 6-C scaling, not because I changed my stance on the subject.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

It is however something that must be changed with a reason other than "I'm just not feeling it anymore". The wiki aims for accuracy over what someone decides on a fickle whim one day then changes their mind on the next.

As ot stands, new information hasn't been brought and no opinions have changed. Yours was decided at the time and outvoted by everyone present. I do not mean to sound uncaring but this simply isn't how things are to be handled.

 

[Xulrev]

It's how things ought to be handled when the current representation is simply, provably, wrong.

The books make explicitly clear it's not an active effect of the dragons, it's ambient energy and they are not outputting the entirety of it perpetually.

Think of it this way: a man builds supports to hold up a 200-storey building, a building which he himself built over a length of time. These supports are faulty and require constant maintenance. The man successfully upkeeps them, but upon his death the building will collapse in a few days.

Would you, genuinely, state the man is High 8-C for sustaining the building? Same thing applies to the dragons; their energy built up the regional effect over time, and their existence sustains it, but conflating that with direct AP is absurdly faulty.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

No, it isn't. Let us review your point. The claim is that since the two of you now wish for Low 7B to be done away with, it should be. That is the beginning and end of it since no new evidence has been provided since last time, the calc itself isn't incorrect, etc etc.

The second thing here was discussed and it was decided to be reasonably doubtful.

Immaterial as it doesn't accurately portray the action. Consider a vehicle built by a man charged by the energy of his brain, why not. This car runs until he dies, and then suddenly goes out of control and crashes into what have you. The man's energy kept it going exerting that energy in some way. That is the case here.

 

[Xulrev]

No, it isn't. Let us review your point. The claim is that since the two of you now wish for Low 7B to be done away with, it should be. That is the beginning and end of it since no new evidence has been provided since last time, the calc itself isn't incorrect, etc etc.

When I can invert your claim and it's directly applicable, there's usually a problem.

'The claim is that since the two of you (Azzy and yourself) now wish for Low 7B to be valid, it should be. That is the beginning and the end of it since...'

From what I understand it was not a real majorty consensus thing here, and if it was, it was via sorely misleading information since the book itself contradicts what the wiki holds as true.

The wiki's purpose is accuracy. This is inaccurate.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

But it wasn't Azzy and myself. It was myself, Udl, Azzy, IIRC Foggy even bloody showed up. The information wasn't misleading as it was discussed and acknowledged and decided to be a constant flow of energy that faded over time.

It is not inaccurate in any way you can reliably prove.

 

[Xulrev]

Considering the book itself outright states that Lair Actions and Regional Effects are disparate things, with legendary creatures only being able to interact with their Lair's ambient power via Lair Actions, yeah it's easily proven Bambu.

This is super straightforward I have no idea how it's so difficult to understand.

 

[RM97]

Question,

Why does most of DND deities have Type 2 Concept hax and Acausality Type 4??? What concepts do they manipulate?

 

[Qawsedf234]

@RM97 D&D Gods embody the concepts that they're in charge of. For example Ares isn't in charge of war, he is war. If Ares were to be killed war as a concept would stop existing until something else took his place. For the Acausality stuff that's because most gods are comparable or superior to being that embody or control time. Zeus for example defeated his father Cronous who embodies the concept of time and Corellon is above an Elven time deity.

 

[RM97]

Okay but Why are they specifically Type 2? Are all concepts in DND transcendental of Reality? Scans for these

And I really don't think Acausality can be scaled like that from one deity who is a confirmed Acausal to another isn't but is superior to the former. Unless ofc they have statements or feats of being an Acausal themselves.

 

[Qawsedf234]

Okay but Why are they specifically Type 2?

Because the concepts, if changed, effect all of reality. When the god of secretes was killed by Orcus secrets as a concept all over the multiverse stopped working until his portfolio was absorbed by other deities. Here's a Greek example.

And I really don't think Acausality can be scaled like that from one deity who is a confirmed Acausal to another isn't but is superior to the former.

Stronger Gods can nullify the power and abilities of weaker gods. They're also capable of resisting/overpowering them. Which is why they're scaled up.

 

[Qawsedf234]

Actually to prevent a derail, I would suggest either moving your question to this thread or making a thread specifically about this topic. The thread at hand is about rather important mid tier scaling so I don't want it to become cluttered.

 

[RM97]

But I really don't see how they are transcendent to Reality. For type 2, the concept should be transcendental to all of reality and they should exist before and after the existence of the objects that participate in the concept. What you showed can also be Type 3 Concept since it too governs reality and changing them affects reality too. If the God of Secrets was killed and Secrets stopped working on the Multiverse only to be resumed by other dieties, then it really doesn't prove that it's Type 2. Do you have any other scans or stuffs to show about their concept Hax?

Yes but how does that prove Acausality tho? If anything that whole "Upscale from weaker Gods" just gives them resistances to all the Haxes of lower gods rather than assigning them into a different state of existence. I heard that Labelas Enoreth is Acausal for making Causality move forward and being unaffected even if it didn't move. While I do see why he is an Acausal, I really don't see how the dieties that have no relation to Labelas or statements or feats of being Acausal. I can see powerful deities getting Resistance to Causality Manipulation and stuff but for Acausality there should be sufficient proof of them Transcending Causality or Working under a different system of Causality too.

 

[Qawsedf234]

As I said, I don't want to derail. Make a new thread with those point or comment in the one I linked.

 

[RM97]

Ah sorry didn't see that comment. My bad.

 

[Dragonstitch]

so if we are just going to ingore the level 1 9-A feat. Since the other version of the spell are 9-B. then shouldn't we ignore 5e's call lighing for speed. Since from what I can find it is the only edition where call lighting is that close.

 

[Qawsedf234]

I dunno what context your comment is about. Currently I'm just waiting on Bambu's calc to be accepted in order to make the changes.