The Tiers System for Encounters Project

[Sinfire Titan]

We have a rating system for base classes, PrCs, and races (sort of). Why not start one for potential enemies? Challenge rating, as we all know, isn't an accurate or efficient means of gauging enemies. Several monsters screw up the CR system, and many monsters have levels in PC classes (which really fucks with it).

First things first: Compile data, decide on rating system. So let's start with the obvious stuff.

List of books with encounter statblocks:

MM1
MM2
MM3
MM4
MM5
Miniatures Handbook
Fiendish Codex 1
Fiendish Codex 2
Book of Exalted Deeds
Book of Vile Darkness
Heroes of Horror
Elder Evils
Monsters of Faerun
Eberron Campaign Setting
Complete Arcane
Complete Psionic

What else?

[Garryl]

Tome of Battle has a trio of monsters, and some sample encounters, too.

[SorO_Lost]

Current rating system is deeply flawed to the point of being comedic material and troll food. If you want to handle monsters which are ten times more diverse than Base Classes you'll need to more accurately define rankings.

[Concerned Ninja Citizen]

Current rating system is deeply flawed to the point of being comedic material and troll food. If you want to handle monsters which are ten times more diverse than Base Classes you'll need to more accurately define rankings.

I'd say the tier system does a better job of accurately expressing the relative power of classes than the CR system does for monsters, at least.

Are we looking for every book with monster statblocks in them? Or something else?

Draconomicon
Dragon Magic
Drow of the Underdark
Dungeonscape
Lords of Madness
Lost Empires of Faerun
Magic of Incarnum
Planar Handbook

[Sinfire Titan]

Current rating system is deeply flawed to the point of being comedic material and troll food. If you want to handle monsters which are ten times more diverse than Base Classes you'll need to more accurately define rankings.

I'd say the tier system does a better job of accurately expressing the relative power of classes than the CR system does for monsters, at least.

Hence this part of my OP:

decide on rating system.

I know full well that the CR system itself won't work as a template. I was wanting to compile the data so I know what sourcebooks to look into.

For the record, my idea for a rating system was:

Sack of HD/Cannon Fodder (Monster is little more threatening than a Warrior or is just basic stats for a player race, IE Ogres, Trolls, Kobolds, Orcs, etc)
Glorified Spellcaster/Caster (Monster is capable of casting actual spells or psionic powers, and those abilities overshadow the monster's actual abilities, IE Most dragons)
Something else (Something to describe enemies that do something more than be a bag of HD or spellcaster, not sure of what examples)
Trap Encounter (Enemies that cannot function without a specific gimmick, IE Roper, Cloaker, Mimic)
Class-based (Enemy is just a base monster with class levels and a few minor special abilities, IE Marrutact)

Then further dividing them by giving an individual monster a rating (probably a number 1-5, with 1's being utterly worthless at their CR, and 5s being far more difficult than their CRs indicate, with 3 being accurately CRed). The monsters would be listed alphabetically, not by their CRs.

Feel free to provide suggestions though.

Are we looking for every book with monster statblocks in them? Or something else?

Pretty much, but only if the book lists new monsters (no sense listing a module just because it has something like Drow Clerics with different domains).

[dither]

Edit: You know what? I think I completely misunderstood the project. I thought you were looking to revise or update the monsters, not reorganize the monsters in a chart or table.

Eh, I'll leave my post but I think it might not be relevant to the topic after all...

...
I created a table to replace monster stats on a per-level system.

Easy Third Edition Monsters (Links to the PDF on my blog)

Basically you throw out the CR system and assign monsters a level based on the level of the PCs in the party. It makes it easier to build encounters -- and works a lot like 4e in that respect.

Incidentally, the numbers check out with later monster publications -- namely those in the Fiendish Codices (Hordes of the Abyss and Tyrants of the Nine Hells).


--Dither

[awaken_D_M_golem]

Yeah 4e did this a little bit better.


If you divorce the underlying build skeleton from
the monster powers, it should clarify or work better.

iirc Dragon + Outsider are low tier 4.
Standard Dragon Sorc casting is rather slow,
and HD wise most progressions are < Adept.

Efreeti should be in the Level 9 spells area, obviously.
Hey I can take Leadership and do my own Tier 1 loop.
Funny the Efreet racial class gets it at the right time.

[Concerned Ninja Citizen]

I know full well that the CR system itself won't work as a template. I was wanting to compile the data so I know what sourcebooks to look into.

Yeah, I get that. I was responding to SorO whose point seemed to be essentially "the tier system sucks" and my rejoiner was "well the CR system sucks more."

For the record, my idea for a rating system was:

Sack of HD/Cannon Fodder (Monster is little more threatening than a Warrior or is just basic stats for a player race, IE Ogres, Trolls, Kobolds, Orcs, etc)
Glorified Spellcaster/Caster (Monster is capable of casting actual spells or psionic powers, and those abilities overshadow the monster's actual abilities, IE Most dragons)
Something else (Something to describe enemies that do something more than be a bag of HD or spellcaster, not sure of what examples)
Trap Encounter (Enemies that cannot function without a specific gimmick, IE Roper, Cloaker, Mimic)
Class-based (Enemy is just a base monster with class levels and a few minor special abilities, IE Marrutact)

I like this. It's similar to the tiers but less of a hierarchy and more of a classification system.

Then further dividing them by giving an individual monster a rating (probably a number 1-5, with 1's being utterly worthless at their CR, and 5s being far more difficult than their CRs indicate, with 3 being accurately CRed). The monsters would be listed alphabetically, not by their CRs.

Maybe use the above classification metric to give monsters a "ECL per HD" type value. That is, a monster that is basically a glorified NPC class would have a value of lower than 1. Maybe 0.5, or even less than that. A more competent monster might have a value of 1, meaning that HD for HD it's about a match for a PC or some number of PCs, and particularly scary monsters could have values higher than 1. Maybe make it per single PC so you can distinguish between monsters that need to be encountered in hordes vs ones that are an encounter by themselves.

This is just typed out rambling thoughts. It might well be utterly unworkable.

Are we looking for every book with monster statblocks in them? Or something else?

Pretty much, but only if the book lists new monsters (no sense listing a module just because it has something like Drow Clerics with different domains).

Cool. I'll finish my list then

Exemplars of Evil: This is borderline. It has encounter statblocks but they aren't new monsters, they're NPCs with class levels. Could be helpful as a point of comparison?

Expanded Psionics Handbook
Fiend Folio
Frostburn
Ghostwalk
Libris Mortis
Sandstorm
Stormwrack
Tome of Magic
Underdark

[Garryl]

When did the tier numbers suddenly get inverted? For consistency, lower numbers (1, 2) should mean high power, and larger numbers (4, 5) should mean low power.

[Endarire]

How close to the current creature roles are we sticking?  Mind you, a creature can have more than 1 role.

 -Artillery: Relies on ranged attacks (archery, thrown weapons, spells, powers) to deal damage.
 SAMPLE: Swift Hunter (Scout/Ranger), traditional Blaster Wizard
 
 -Assassin: An adversary dependent upon stealth for its greatest effects, like an idealized Rogue.  Usually severely gimped without stealth.
 SAMPLE: Babau
 
-Brute: A Brute is a melee combatant, favoring offense over defense.
 SAMPLE: Raging Orc Barbarian

-Caster: Uses spells, psionic powers, spell-like abilities, or psi-like abilities as its primary means of effectiveness.  This role on its own can be useful, but further detail helps.  (Is this creature artillery?  A buffer?  A controller?  A mastermind?)
SAMPLE: Rakshasa
 
 -Controller: Emphasizes disabling or incapacitating foes (grease, glitterdust, color spray, web, hold person), or taking direct control of them (charm monster, dominate person).
 SAMPLE: Traditional God Wizard, Trip-happy melee guy
 
 -Decathlete: Able to do a significant amount of everything well (or just most roles).
 SAMPLE: Many true dragons once they get spells, many Demons/Devils/Angels
 
 -Mastermind: Normally has minions with it, or relies on gaining them quickly (summoning, calling, animating).
 SAMPLE: Malconvoker Summoner
 
 -Minion: A Minion's strength is in numbers.  In combat, Minions largely exist to absorb actions, get in the way, distract foes, do misc. stuff (pull levers, release the hounds, steal items), and die quickly.  Combat with Minions in their element is usually slow due to the unit count.
 SAMPLE: Kobolds and goblins straight from the Monster Manual (no class levels or special things)
 
 -Mover: Mobility is its thing.  Its movement modes and speeds are noteworthy for its CR.
 SAMPLE: Earth Elemental (via Earth Glide), teleport/plane hopping-happy creatures, low-level flying creatures
 
 -Non-Combat Expert: Its major strength is out of combat, usually with skills.  It may be the world's best socialite or lockpick or craftsman or animal trainer.
 SAMPLE: Succubus, skill-focused Rogue or Factotum
 
 -One-Shotter: Exactly what it says on the tin.  A One-Shotter specializes in abilities that take out foes in one shot, usually 1 at a time (flesh to stone, finger of death, Ubercharging, big boom spells).  Failure to one-shot usually means the One-Shotter is out of luck.
 SAMPLE: Save-or-die expert, Hood
 
 -Puzzle: The point is to find out how to beat it.  Beating it usually requires ad-hoc or other special mechanics, or something very specific.  This creature may also be defeatable normally, but has some obscure severe weakness.
 SAMPLE: Golems (low Reflex save weakness), Rakshasa (had a blessed crossbow bolt weakness, at least in previous editions), Swarms (use AoEs)
 
-Scout: Gathers information and spies on its enemies.  Usually stealthy.  Often has a combat-viable role, too.
 SAMPLE: Eagle (Animal), Imp
 
 -Tank: Built to take or/and negate a hit (as much as the game system will allow), emphasizing defense over offense.  May also emphasize crowd control to prevent enemies from reaching his allies
 SAMPLE: Lockdown Crusader, Iron Golem, Shield Guardian
 

[SorO_Lost]

KISS, too many roles. 4th didn't even think that many was necessary and it type cast everyone.

I'd say give it not a tier but a 1~5 star scale basing 3 on Optimize by Number's averages for said CR.

The ODMTS system
Offense: Attack/damage, bonus point for melee & ranged.
Defense: Below average AC? Additional defenses? CR 2 but Lawful/Magical Damage Reduction?
Mobility: How is it speed? Additional forms of movement?
Tactics: Any abusive tactics or 1 star straight forward it's there and it attacks?
SLAs/Spells: Does it have any? Versatile? Mimicking Class based Spellcasting?

[Sinfire Titan]

KISS, too many roles. 4th didn't even think that many was necessary and it type cast everyone.

I'd say give it not a tier but a 1~5 star scale basing 3 on Optimize by Number's averages for said CR.

The ODMTS system
Offense: Attack/damage, bonus point for melee & ranged.
Defense: Below average AC? Additional defenses? CR 2 but Lawful/Magical Damage Reduction?
Mobility: How is it speed? Additional forms of movement?
Tactics: Any abusive tactics or 1 star straight forward it's there and it attacks?
SLAs/Spells: Does it have any? Versatile? Mimicking Class based Spellcasting?

Sounds like a decent idea. I'll consider this one.

[dither]

I revised the definitions of the 4e roles to reflect a more clear-cut approach to combat strategy:

active/passive
active roles focus on maximizing their own turn with greater accuracy and reliability
passive roles focus on maximizing the off-turn relying on triggers to maximize potential

direct/indirect
direct roles focus on dealing high single-target damage against static defenses
indirect roles focus on dealing damage to multiple targets (bursts, blasts, zones, and other AoEs), applying non-damaging conditions (confuse, slow, daze, blind, etc.), and/or target nonstandard/variable defenses (saving throws in 3e, save-ends effects in 4e)

Striker: active, direct
Defender: passive, direct
Controller: active, indirect
Leader: passive, indirect

An example of how a striker might be active and direct would be a rogue with sneak attack and two-weapon fighting making multiple attacks with main- and off-hand weapons For Massive Damage. An example of how a leader is passive and indirect would be healing the above rogue and removing a debilitating poison to enable him to get back to dual-weapon sneak-attacking.


--Dither