D&D 5E Fixing Challenge Rating

[dudebobmac]

Are you looking for any assistance with any aspect of this? I'm a software engineer with a math degree so working on a software tool to help fix one of my biggest frustrations as both a DM and a math nerd would be a ton of fun!

 

[Maxperson]

Don't forget their saves as well. If the monsters were to use abilities that target's the group's weak saves that can have a dramatic difference than attacks against the PC's strong saves (and/or resistances).

My biggest beef with the current CR system is it doesn't account for non-hp attacks or abilities (stun, banish, walls) very well, so you get wildly off on creatures like Ghouls or Shadow's Strength attacks.

The two biggest issues with CR in my opinion are as follows, and you touched on the first one above.

First, every class is different and has varying strengths and weaknesses. You might have a group of PCs with low wisdom and no proficiency in wisdom saves, so the monster with a DC of their level that has it's main attack using a strong wisdom save DC will be significantly harder for them than the DC indicates. I don't see how a DC system can account for all the variables involved in class/subclass combinations.

Second, player skill has a significant impact, but there's no way to account for that in any system. The DM has to be aware and adjust for that himself.

Your second point above isn't that big of a deal to me personally. I just look at those abilities and knowing the PC saves involved, figure out the likely number of failed saves in the initial use of the ability or frequency of a continue use of an ability like ghoul paralysis. Then I look at the probably number of PCs left and their capabilities to see if they have a chance, will still do well, will be challenged, etc. I also need to know if there are abilities in the group that can undo the monster special attack, because that matters as well.

CR for me has always simply been a stepping off point. I start looking at monsters +/- 3 CR from the group and then start comparing strengths and weaknesses. CR ballparks monsters and then I have to fine tune things.

 

[James Gasik]

Happy New Years, Mearls! Great to see you here again and good luck with the coding!

I've leaned into the "art" side of combat design (I'll attach the cheat sheet I use for guesstimating difficulty of fights), but I always appreciate it when someone takes a hard look at the numbers. I'll definitely watch for what you come up with.

Are you committed to defining difficulty by % HP loss expected? Or did you consider including other resources expended there? I know I've had a conversation with my players after a combat where we had differences of perspective about how difficult the fight was and it came down to me as GM focusing on HP loss / downed PCs, and the players being a bit more focused on other resources expended.

Just wanted to say- this is brilliant, and is extremely good advice. This should be in the DMG!

 

[Sulicius]

I use the Lazy DM encounter benchmark, since it is so hard to truly balance an encounter.

If encounter building takes more time that ready a stat block, it’s probably too complicated. If we can’t build an encounter on the fly during a session, it is probably not useful for me.

I’d love to see more of this!

 

[Zardnaar]

I called CR out back in 2014/15. Hit point inflation is a thing.

I use a rough 1 Mook per PC and one boss. What counts as a Mook depends on the level and how optimized the PCs are.

 

[Sulicius]

I called CR out back in 2014/15. Hit point inflation is a thing.

I use a rough 1 Mook per PC and one boss. What counts as a Mook depends on the level and how optimized the PCs are.

What is hit point inflation? Because I am more familiar with PC damage inflation.

 

[Zardnaar]

What is hit point inflation? Because I am more familiar with PC damage inflation.

Look at 5E monsters vs older editions.

Generally they have double or triple the hit points.

So a spell like fireball looks good but it's really only doing 3 or 4d6 relative to a 3.5 or AD&D one.

So the numbers look bigger and people think 5E classes are better but they kind of aren't.

Which also means classes like Artificer, Monks and Rogue's struggle. Rogues doing 3.5 level damage (less most of the time) but in ac5E environment.

You eithervwant bog damage numbers or spells that target int/wis/cha saves and or deal radiant/psychic/force damage.

 

[Jahydin]

This is the most excited I've been about 5E in years.

Looking forward to reading/supporting your future projects.

 

[Sulicius]

Look at 5E monsters vs older editions.

Generally they have double or triple the hit points.

So a spell like fireball looks good but it's really only doing 3 or 4d6 relative to a 3.5 or AD&D one.

So the numbers look bigger and people think 5E classes are better but they kind of aren't.

Which also means classes like Artificer, Monks and Rogue's struggle. Rogues doing 3.5 level damage (less most of the time) but in ac5E environment.

You eithervwant bog damage numbers or spells that target int/wis/cha saves and or deal radiant/psychic/force damage.

Why are we looking at 3.5e or older editions? I don’t see the relevance. This has its own math and progression.

Are we trying to use their encounter building rules?

 

[Zardnaar]

Why are we looking at 3.5e or older editions? I don’t see the relevance. This has its own math and progression.

Are we trying to use their encounter building rules?

Start of thread Mearls said they based the CR system on 3.5.

One can look at the numbers. Magical healing sucks in 5E because they heal 3.5 levels in 5E dynamic.

5E damage spells are slightly ahead of 3.5 but the numbers are inflated. It's basically an illusion.

This is basically what I mean when I talk about hit point inflation. It effects the CR system, how damage dealing spells interact in combat, magical healing rates, class balance etc.

It's all related. I basically claimed the encounter guidelines didn't work back in 2015.

Basically you want to target 5E anemic saves vs dealing with 5E bloated hit points in combat. Which the CR and encounter guidelines and the 6-8 encounter guidelines fail miserably at.