D&D 5E Encounter XP # of Monster Multiplying

[Agamon]

I think the real answer is that you largely ignore the rule; just keep it a little bit in the back corner of your mind when you're talking about a lot lot of things. The basic concept is fine - "If a creature has a mechanic that scales better with allies, don't throw too much at the PCs", but the execution "Don't even bother to check if it has such mechanics, or what you're using, just start doubling and quadrupling xp all over the place" leaves a lot to be desired.

This is my conclusion. The DMG should do away with the math regarding this and just explain that being outnumbered makes things tougher.

 

[Li Shenron]

This is my conclusion. The DMG should do away with the math regarding this and just explain that being outnumbered makes things tougher.

I agree, useless rules should simply not belong to the game...

 

[Jester David]

The math works alright when using monsters of the same Challenge.
When using monsters of different Challenge, it's probably better to total them up individually then add the totals.

 

[Savage Wombat]

I agree, useless rules should simply not belong to the game...

These aren't "useless rules" - these are estimation guidelines. To help inexperienced DMs get a handle on what kind of fight is going to result in the outcome they want.

Do we really want all the new players to have experiences like those who said the Starter Set was full of TPKs? Or the guy who couldn't get through Dragon Queen because there aren't enough rests between fights?

 

[rjfTrebor]

the multiplier rules have worked ok for me, but i've only used them three times and all with similar CRs.

 

[Li Shenron]

These aren't "useless rules" - these are estimation guidelines. To help inexperienced DMs get a handle on what kind of fight is going to result in the outcome they want.

Do we really want all the new players to have experiences like those who said the Starter Set was full of TPKs? Or the guy who couldn't get through Dragon Queen because there aren't enough rests between fights?

Yes but are these estimation correct, or even reasonable? I hope they are, but in this thread it's being pointed out that if you don't have monsters of similar CR (or close enough), strange things happen quickly to those estimations. Indeed even the possible results of the estimations are pretty vague since the start: easy, moderate, hard, deadly... do beginners DM understand what "deadly" means? I am neither an expert nor a beginner DM, and yet I can see multiple meanings associated to the expression "deadly encounter"!

What I mean to say is, guidelines are useful if they are (1) easy to understand, (2) easy to apply and (3) yield reasonably reliable results. If the bottom line is that "you have to eyeball", then having a whole page you need to read twice to understand, and a table with presumption of being mathematical, is becoming useless. That's why I agree with [MENTION=184]Agamon[/MENTION] at [MENTION=43019]keterys[/MENTION] that "less numbers and more words" would do a better favor to a DM.

 

[Li Shenron]

the multiplier rules have worked ok for me, but i've only used them three times and all with similar CRs.

Good.

So let's just focus on similar CR for a second... What have you observed in those 3 times? Which difficulty categories have you seen, i.e. did it go e.g. from Easy to Moderate, from Easy to Hard, from Moderate to Deadly...? Did the encounters "feel" as hard as the difficulty labels said, after multiplying?

If this is what happened, great! Maybe the estimation system works, which is good for everybody.

Then I still wonder one thing... if the difficulty increases, why doesn't the reward?

 

[lkj]

Yes but are these estimation correct, or even reasonable? I hope they are, but in this thread it's being pointed out that if you don't have monsters of similar CR (or close enough), strange things happen quickly to those estimations. Indeed even the possible results of the estimations are pretty vague since the start: easy, moderate, hard, deadly... do beginners DM understand what "deadly" means? I am neither an expert nor a beginner DM, and yet I can see multiple meanings associated to the expression "deadly encounter"!

What I mean to say is, guidelines are useful if they are (1) easy to understand, (2) easy to apply and (3) yield reasonably reliable results. If the bottom line is that "you have to eyeball", then having a whole page you need to read twice to understand, and a table with presumption of being mathematical, is becoming useless. That's why I agree with [MENTION=184]Agamon[/MENTION] at [MENTION=43019]keterys[/MENTION] that "less numbers and more words" would do a better favor to a DM.

I agree. But I think the guidelines could be very, very useful for encounter building. So I'd rather focus on fixing them or adding some clarifying text than removing them entirely because they don't work in every circumstance. If that means a little parenthetical that says 'these guidelines are intended for circumstances when the attackers are all of a similar CR, if CR's are divergent then . . .' I'd rather have that than be left with 'oh, being outnumbered is dangerous.' The reason is that I, and I suspect many DM's, will frequently be in the circumstance of wanting to outnumber our PC's.

AD