Troll Lord Games

(sorry...thread #89,483 on challenge levels)

Diving into C&C...and having trouble with Challenge Levels. I'm sure these have been asked many times.

1-5 makes for an easy task, 6-10 is difficult, 11-15 is very difficult, and 16-20 heroically difficult.

Can someone point me to a good explanation of why as a CK I'd pick 3 instead 4 or pick 13 instead of 12?

Can someone point me to a "basic CL" guide such as what would a "knock down average door" be or a "bend average cell bars" be?

Thanks!

I don't believe there is anything official in the way of guidelines. The only exception to that would be challenge levels based on an opponent's HD. For example, a level 13 thief would set a CL 13 trap, whereas a level 12 thief would set a CL 12 trap. The granularity you are asking about is built into the system when opponent HD come into play.

Not so much for things like the CL to knock down a door or bend a cell bar. I envision two scenarios. First, you are talking about setting a CL when prepping for an adventure in advance. Second, you are talking about with coming up with a CL on the fly during play.

Either way, your starting point is still the CL guidance from the PHB you quoted. If you want an easy CL, go with 1-5. But, you say, you want guidance on how to make it more granular. Why go with a CL 2 as opposed to 3 where hit dice are not involved?

In the case of prepping CLs in advance of the play session, you just need to pick something. What sounds good to you? Do you want the task to be really easy (a CL of 1), kind of easy (maybe a CL of 3), or pretty easy, but getting tougher (CL of 5)? It all comes down to DM fiat. Pick something and run with it. It's not worth stressing out over. It's like monster hit points. Over the course of a campaign, it really isn't going to matter whether an ogre has 10 versus 12 hit points. Yeah, a PC may die if you go with he higher number, but luck is probably a much bigger factor in the PC's death than the hit points. And, so what if the PC dies/fails? The PC wins all of the fat loot and lusty wenches by taking risks. If you want precisely tailored, officially-approved risk levels, play Pathfinder.

In the case of setting a CL on the fly, I suggest a similar thought process, but only if necessary. Before even screwing with setting a granular CL, have the PC roll her d20. If the net result is really high relative to the general CL category you have in mind (for example, a modified 25 where the stat is prime and you figure it is an easy task (i.e., a CC at most of 17), then you are good to go and there is no need to worry about the granular CL value. If the net d20 roll is really low (e.g., less than 12), you know the PC failed and there is no reason to worry about the specific CL. The only tricky part comes when the net d20 roll comes out somewhere in the middle so that the granular CL might be relevant. Only at that point should you start thinking about the specific CL. And that's when you go back to DM fiat. Just make a call, calculate the CC, and move on. "Just make a call" may not be a very satisfying answer to your question, but I think it is the only real answer. C&C is supposed to play fast. Don't agonize over decisions like this. Pick something within the ranges suggested by the PHB and run with it.

Engineering Dungeons had a guideline of using the dungeon level for traps / locks when the creator level was unknown. This to avoid the inflation of difficulty. A 10 is a definite challenge, even for a name level PC, and nearly impossible for lower. Barring circumstance or house rules that 20s always succeed.

Thanks for the replies!

I guess to my thinking it doesn't matter if I "just pick a CL" or "pick the HD of who created the thing in question and the HD becomes the CL" - works out the same. I'm just picking a number that "feels right at the time".

As a player though...say I miss my roll. Say I miss my roll by 1. I might then question "why'd you set this at CL 5 instead of CL 4?" But as you say "roll the dice and move on".


Still would like list of example CL's if someone could point me to one.

Ha.

Just had this thought if the player complains that CL was 5 instead of 4.

CK should just say "if you rolled better it wouldn't matter now would it?".

capmarvel wrote:(sorry...thread #89,483 on challenge levels)

Diving into C&C...and having trouble with Challenge Levels. I'm sure these have been asked many times.

1-5 makes for an easy task, 6-10 is difficult, 11-15 is very difficult, and 16-20 heroically difficult.

Can someone point me to a good explanation of why as a CK I'd pick 3 instead 4 or pick 13 instead of 12?

Can someone point me to a "basic CL" guide such as what would a "knock down average door" be or a "bend average cell bars" be?

Thanks!

The two things to keep in mind are 1) party level and 2) the level of the "monster" that set the challenge.

The C&C nomenclature of 1-5 as easy is misleading. A 1st level character facing a non prime "easy" level 5 check (So must make a "23") with no attribute or other benefits has a roughly 0% chance of success unless a 20 always succeeds. Someone who was prime (must make a "17") would have a roughly 25% chance. Hardly easy

As I have said before, a better nomenclature would be 1-5 standard, 6-10 expert, 11-15 olympian, 16-20 superhuman. If you keep that in mind, you will be setting most of your challenges for the party in the 1-5 range for a loooong time (because it is "standard")

Although it smacks of artificiality, you will be setting most challenges close to the party level (which makes a prime challenge a roughly 50/50 proposition if they have no other bonuses).

Now, things are a bit different for something like smashing an iron bound door or broad jumping a 6' chasm or remembering a long forgotten name. These things would be a set CL and would not increase as players level. But again, I would think to myself, is this chasm jump something that a normal person might accomplish, a very fit "gym" person, an olympian, or only a superhuman?

I like to think of CL as the same as my average class level in the group then go up or down from there if I think what they are trying to do should be hard or easy for them to do.

Ex. Fighter needs to lift a fallen timber.. its big, its heavy but I don't feel like detailing its weight and everything.. so I just want to make it hard to lift.... so I set the CL at 2 for my 1st level fighter.. should be able to pull it off 50/50... if I want it to be easy, then I make it a -5 CL or don't even bother with the roll and say, if you set yourselves and three of you work together.... sometimes just set the task, see how the players will want to go at the challenge you've given them, THEN set the CL and work out the numbers IF and only IF you think their solution is not a sure thing.

But what is key, as others have warned, is a prime vs non-prime is a 6 point difference on a 12 or better or an 18 or better. Some levels and plusses and anything but a crap roll wins the day for a prime save.. but an 18 challenge gets tough.

Watch for things where all PCs must each make a roll.. after six PCs roll to do something like cross a narrow bridge over a bottomless chasm and chances are one is going to miss.. so be ready for that. Here was a fun one, "OK folks the ditch looks nasty and filled with black stinky water, its a slippery bank into and out of the thing, about 6 to 10' across depending on where you try to cross, you have no idea how deep it is..." so as the party makes their DEX checks to get down, leap across and get up the slippery muddy bank they all make it but the nimble thief who rolled a 1.. I "narrated his fumble" into having him slip on the way down, splash through the 6" deep stagnant and mucky water and fall flat on his face trying to recover with grace going up the far bank.. lasting effects, muddy, wet feet, and he now stinks to high heaven, the mud was putrid. Not a big deal until he was tracked by scent.... and looked like crap in front of the cute new elven princess who came to join the combat in the forest clearing...

Buttmonkey wrote:In the case of setting a CL on the fly, I suggest a similar thought process, but only if necessary. Before even screwing with setting a granular CL, have the PC roll her d20. If the net result is really high relative to the general CL category you have in mind (for example, a modified 25 where the stat is prime and you figure it is an easy task (i.e., a CC at most of 17), then you are good to go and there is no need to worry about the granular CL value. If the net d20 roll is really low (e.g., less than 12), you know the PC failed and there is no reason to worry about the specific CL. The only tricky part comes when the net d20 roll comes out somewhere in the middle so that the granular CL might be relevant. Only at that point should you start thinking about the specific CL. And that's when you go back to DM fiat. Just make a call, calculate the CC, and move on. "Just make a call" may not be a very satisfying answer to your question, but I think it is the only real answer. C&C is supposed to play fast. Don't agonize over decisions like this. Pick something within the ranges suggested by the PHB and run with it.

This is how I handle it.

R-

Rules are my guidelines, not my master. That being said, I see the CL according to how likely I want it to be successful for the players in question. Since I am good at calculating percentages in my head, this is easy for me to do on the fly. Generally speaking, I look at the level of the players PC's, and set the CL based on how likely or unlikely I want it to be for their success. If its versus a given creature/opponent, or group of such, I use their HD/Lvl as my base CL.

I even have CL's of +1 to +5. Meaning its not a given that they will do it, but the task is so easy, the lock so crappy, whatever, that I will give them an additional +1 to +5 to their roll. Especially when they are still in the low level range, IE levels 1 to 5 as a group.

So if I want them to have a low chance of success, I'll set the CL so that they have anywhere from a 5 to 20% chance of success. Somewhat difficult, I'll set the CL to put their chances in the 25 to 50% chance of success, and set it lower and lower depending on how easy I want it to be.

So for a simple example, lets assume a level 5 party with no modifiers. With a Prime to be "hard" to succeed with, to get my 5 to 20% chance of success, I know to set the CL between 9 to 13, to make it so they have to roll a 16 or higher on the dice.

If I want them to have closer to a 50/50 chance I know to set the CL at 3, so they will succeed on a roll of 10 or better. If I want it to be more like a 40% chance, I set the CL at 5.

So I don't really look at how the Trolls label the ranges, I look at the level of the PC's, and decide on what chances/odds of success I want them to have, and set the CL from there. Of course, I will also factor in their attributes, magic items, etc... to make sure I am setting the appropriate "Challenge" for their over all ability. My example is just so I can illustrate as simply as possible how I go about deciding upon my CL's.

If you are not allowed to add level, these all go down by 5%, making a cross-class skill check for a stat of -3 and non-prime impossible for CL 0 even if a check is allowed by the CK.
Likewise, these get easier by 5% every level of the character.

If you want a normal SIEGE roll to be possible by any level 1 character, it must be no greater than CL 0.
If you want it to be possible for an average character regardless of prime, you shouldn't go higher than CL 3.
If you want it to be possible for only the best characters regardless of prime, you shouldn't go higher than CL 6.

As the party levels up, you can increase these by level. Note that this also gives you an idea of what kind of creatures can be fought as some rolls and saves are opposed by the foe's HD.

In C&C stats don't automatically increase on leveling, but for most SIEGE checks you can add level. When fighting foes, saves vs their attacks and spells will scale to level, that is, if you are the same level as them, you will not have a net advantage or disadvantage (to saving throws). This is also true of CLs set to an opposing character's level or HD, say, defeating a trap set by a rogue of a certain level.

Most challenges however are static. A mountain which is CL 10 to climb at level 1 is still CL 10 at level 20. But the worst character will never be able to climb it until their level is the same. Environmental challenges should generally not have any regard for the ranges of abilities of the characters, they just are.

This is fair and reasonable for a sandbox. But in a directed adventure, where crossing the mountain is important, you'd better build in an easier slope somewhere or change the mountain, or your group will never reach their destination.

Back to the original question, what is a list of CLs? Such a list would be subjective, but you can start with the D20 reference: http://www.d20srd.org/indexes/skills.htm . There you'll convert a DC of 15 to a CL of 0, with each point up or down being applied to the CL.

This can result in a negative CL. Some people seem to frown on a negative CL, but given the difficulty for some characters of even a modest CL, I don't have any objection at all.

Great discussion here.

capmarvel wrote:Ha.

Just had this thought if the player complains that CL was 5 instead of 4.

CK should just say "if you rolled better it wouldn't matter now would it?".

This confuses me. I find it hard to imagine getting into a situation where a player challenges me to defend a challenge level I picked. It would have to be a pretty rare situation for me to even reveal a CL to a player. I ask the players to tell me what they rolled and I tell them if they succeeded. If a player ever asked me why a CL was set at a specific number, I would tell them the CL is what it is because I said so. I would certainly never try to justify the CL. If a player really got pissy about it, I'd fall back on telling them it's my responsibility to run a fun game. If the player doesn't trust me to do that, they should probably go play somewhere else. Otherwise, they need to drop it so the game can keep moving. I can't see any upside to ever explain or justify why I set a CL at a specific amount.

Aergraith wrote:
If you want a normal SIEGE roll to be possible by any level 1 character, it must be no greater than CL 0.
If you want it to be possible for an average character regardless of prime, you shouldn't go higher than CL 3.
If you want it to be possible for only the best characters regardless of prime, you shouldn't go higher than CL 6.

You lose me on the first line. How is it IMPOSSIBLE for a level 1 character to make a NORMAL CL check of higher than 0? To make it impossible for a non Prime check, it would have to be CL of 3 (Final of 21), for a Prime check it would have to be a CL of 9 (final of 21) to make such a normal check to be impossible. That is if you require them to beat the final number, if they only have to meet or exceed, raise both CL's by 1 to make it impossible.

Treebore wrote:

Aergraith wrote:
If you want a normal SIEGE roll to be possible by any level 1 character, it must be no greater than CL 0.
If you want it to be possible for an average character regardless of prime, you shouldn't go higher than CL 3.
If you want it to be possible for only the best characters regardless of prime, you shouldn't go higher than CL 6.

You lose me on the first line. How is it IMPOSSIBLE for a level 1 character to make a NORMAL CL check of higher than 0? To make it impossible for a non Prime check, it would have to be CL of 3 (Final of 21), for a Prime check it would have to be a CL of 9 (final of 21) to make such a normal check to be impossible. That is if you require them to beat the final number, if they only have to meet or exceed, raise both CL's by 1 to make it impossible.

By any, I mean every. A CL 1 check is not attainable if you have a -3 stat penalty and are non-prime.

20 - 3 +1 = 18 < CB(18) + CL(1) = CC (19)

Aergraith wrote:

Treebore wrote:

Aergraith wrote:
If you want a normal SIEGE roll to be possible by any level 1 character, it must be no greater than CL 0.
If you want it to be possible for an average character regardless of prime, you shouldn't go higher than CL 3.
If you want it to be possible for only the best characters regardless of prime, you shouldn't go higher than CL 6.

You lose me on the first line. How is it IMPOSSIBLE for a level 1 character to make a NORMAL CL check of higher than 0? To make it impossible for a non Prime check, it would have to be CL of 3 (Final of 21), for a Prime check it would have to be a CL of 9 (final of 21) to make such a normal check to be impossible. That is if you require them to beat the final number, if they only have to meet or exceed, raise both CL's by 1 to make it impossible.

By any, I mean every. A CL 1 check is not attainable if you have a -3 stat penalty and are non-prime.

20 - 3 +1 = 18 < CB(18) + CL(1) = CC (19)

Ah, I didn't catch the -3 attribute penalty, I thought it was just being a level 1 character, period. NOW it makes sense!

Additionally, if the pc should be able to reasonably accomplish the task, say a barbarian trying to burst thru a door (an unreinforced wood door), then skip the die rolling all together and keep the story moving.

Buttmonkey wrote:

capmarvel wrote:Ha.

Just had this thought if the player complains that CL was 5 instead of 4.

CK should just say "if you rolled better it wouldn't matter now would it?".

This confuses me. I find it hard to imagine getting into a situation where a player challenges me to defend a challenge level I picked. It would have to be a pretty rare situation for me to even reveal a CL to a player. I ask the players to tell me what they rolled and I tell them if they succeeded. If a player ever asked me why a CL was set at a specific number, I would tell them the CL is what it is because I said so. I would certainly never try to justify the CL. If a player really got pissy about it, I'd fall back on telling them it's my responsibility to run a fun game. If the player doesn't trust me to do that, they should probably go play somewhere else. Otherwise, they need to drop it so the game can keep moving. I can't see any upside to ever explain or justify why I set a CL at a specific amount.

Either I failed my Tell Joke skill (CL=3) or you failed your Detect Sarcasm (CL=2).

capmarvel wrote:

Buttmonkey wrote:

capmarvel wrote:Ha.

Just had this thought if the player complains that CL was 5 instead of 4.

CK should just say "if you rolled better it wouldn't matter now would it?".

This confuses me. I find it hard to imagine getting into a situation where a player challenges me to defend a challenge level I picked. It would have to be a pretty rare situation for me to even reveal a CL to a player. I ask the players to tell me what they rolled and I tell them if they succeeded. If a player ever asked me why a CL was set at a specific number, I would tell them the CL is what it is because I said so. I would certainly never try to justify the CL. If a player really got pissy about it, I'd fall back on telling them it's my responsibility to run a fun game. If the player doesn't trust me to do that, they should probably go play somewhere else. Otherwise, they need to drop it so the game can keep moving. I can't see any upside to ever explain or justify why I set a CL at a specific amount.

Either I failed my Tell Joke skill (CL=3) or you failed your Detect Sarcasm (CL=2).

means joking.

When being sarcastic, I try to remember to put (/sarcasm) at the end of my sarcastic statement(s).

If the "Ha" at the very top of my post didn't indicate "warning: attempt at humor coming" then I'm not sure a bunch of would help.