D&D 5E CRs and what is going on?

[Azurewraith]

I think the reason the Balor along with others seems so weak is the fact the from my PoV 5e is supposed to be played with the stat array, no feats and minimum magic items.

 

[Zardnaar]

The CR system and encounter math doesn't really work.

 

[CapnZapp]

The CR system and encounter math doesn't really work.

Yes, the best advice for any edition of D&D is to completely ignore the entire chapter on encounter budgets and cr/xp calculations.

It has never worked and never will.

Why?

Because its purpose is not to actually work, it's purpose is to sell the illusion creating "balanced" encounters is easy and can be done by any new DM.

Its purpose is to make you buy the game. When you realize you're better off without the EL CR XP systems, you're already hooked and well on your way to doing fine on your own.

Its only those who stubbornly insist the encounter building guidelines must work that get the short end of the stick.

So put down this thread, forget about the whole system, and everything will be for the better!

 

[Iosue]

Takes two stabs to kill someone in 5E. Balor gets one longsword attack per action.

The one longsword attack is going to auto-crit, leading to 68 points of damage, enough to kill outright all but the most hardy 7th level adventurers. Even a fighter with a +3 CON is going to have only 67 hp. If they happen to have higher HP and still survive, a killing blow doesn't have to be a sword -- the whip will do just fine. Follow-up that stab with a whip strike and that character is dead.

Might be a bit rough, though. Still, a single attack on a down character that forces 2 death save failures will at the least incentivize the PCs to use actions attending to their comrade, rather than dealing damage.

 

[S'mon]

Yes, the best advice for any edition of D&D is to completely ignore the entire chapter on encounter budgets and cr/xp calculations.

IME it works ok in 4e D&D, which really seems designed around it. Otherwise I'd agree, 3e/PF and 5e work best if you ignore that stuff and only use CR as a guide to XP awards.

 

[Quickleaf]

As listed in the MM, the balor gets ONE sword and ONE whip attack. For a combined average damage of 59, more than 36 but not anywhere close to the 99+ figure quoted by some parties here as far as I can see. (Longsword - 21 slashing and 13 lightning; whip - 15 slashing and 10 fire). A GM -might- be able to skew the damage upward a little bit if they reason that the balor can hoist the enemy up into the air for a bit of falling damage or that an enemy that is pulled against the fire aura takes that damage as well (a whopping 10 points fire). Regardless, the damage is STILL pathetic for a CR 19 combat beast.

My 99+ damage estimate was based on this:

Each round the balor is engaged with two PCs in melee combat who take full damage from its Fire Aura: 2 * 10 = 20 fire damage net

Each round the balor endures 4 melee attacks made from PCs within 5 feet, triggering the second part of its Fire Aura: 4 * 10 = 40 fire damage net

Each round the balor hits with both longsword and whip: 34 + 25 = 59 damage net (of which 10 is fire)

All told that is 119 damage (70 of which is fire).

I adjusted this down to close to 80% of this "perfect scenario" to represent less than ideal conditions for the balor. Hence my rough 99 value.

This estimate is reasonable if you leave out the (very likely) possibility of PCs have fire resistance and/or immunity.

 

[Quickleaf]

In MM, Balor gets 1 whip (25 dmg) + 1 longsword (34 dmg), total 59 damage (edit!) (IF both hit- vs ac19 chances of both hitting is 64%, far from 100%). Bear in mind aura damage is only start of Balor turn, and only 10 dmg.

My revised Balor was CR 19.

That's actually not entirely accurate. The Balor aura has 2 parts to it.

OOC: Fire Aura. <part 1> At the start of each of the balor's turns , each creature within 5 feet of it takes 10 (3d6) fire damage, and flammable objects in the aura that aren't being worn or carried ignite. <part 2> A creature that touches the balor or hits it with a melee attack while within 5 feet of it takes 10 (3d6) fire damage.

While the 1st part is limited to at the start of the balor's turn, the 2nd part has no such limitation. It's ANY melee attack made within 5 feet that hits.

 

[shoak1]

MM Balor dies in 1 round vs 6x L7 PCs when they have dailies to pop. Bye Bye...No beg.of Balor turn for aura to get a little spread damage to pad its stats. No need to even combat heal the guy the Balor almost killed.

He comes in, he says "boo," then gets pwn'd by a bunch of school kids. That's a problem.So much for the fearsome foe of lord of the Rings. Gandalf, you = suck.

Give up the argument, apologists. Own it.
"But he should have teleported away!" No survival for big demon, he doesn't get a 2nd round to teleport away.
"But he's got a cool whip and can use it to..." Your missing the point bro.
"But he could crit!!!!" You too. See line above.
"But each table is different" So what? I still want a basic CR rating as a guide for each monster to save me some time prepping. I can then adjust it a bit based on my players.
"The books are just a guide, DM makes the rules" Yeah, but bro, I didn't want to have to repair mistakes to basic core book stuff.
"You must be playing w/min-maxers" Nope, don't need tricked up PCs for a repeat of this fiasco.
"Its cuz you're playing with....FEATS" Nope, just takes 1 more round for average no-trick PCs to pwn Gandalf's Bane.
"Its still fun anyway, that's what's important!!!!" Yeahhhhhh....you got me there buddy...(backing away slowly)....

And Balor the Cupcake of Kaza-dum is not the only problem. The designers/development/playtesters just did a crap job of CR assignments, bottom line, sorry. While many CR ratings aren't far off, many MM creatures bear no semblance of reality to their stated Cr rating. I've played this game since the mid 70s (lets say approx.18,246.322 hrs play time), and while 5e overall rocks, their work on 5e MM blows chunks.....like it was done by some employee with a grudge that's smiling right now and saying "Got u MODED!!!" while doing the Safety Dance (pre-teens, you may need to look that one up in urban dictionary). S-S-S-S, A-A-A-A-A, F-F-F-F-F,E-E-E-E......

 

[Azurewraith]

I do have to admit i think most of the Core 5e books are great but the MM does kind of suck and well the encounter building rules in general they take it way to easy on the players. Its a shame 4e seemed to have encounter building down.

Im not going to say i speak for everyone but at my table my PCs get stupid if there is no fear of dying such then die and are like WTF we just killed XXXX uber monster but we try and take on one teeny weeny stronghold with 100 orcs and we die gtfo of here.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Im not going to say i speak for everyone but at my table my PCs get stupid if there is no fear of dying such then die and are like WTF we just killed XXXX uber monster but we try and take on one teeny weeny stronghold with 100 orcs and we die gtfo of here.

"Quantity has a quality of its own" was a design goal for Bounded Accuracy. They WANTED low-level PCs to be able to tackle dragons by rallying villagers, or guards to be able to plausibly hold off fire giants without needing to be high-level fighters.

And of course they wanted the monster roster to expand and never contract. Orc Hordes are supposed to still be a threat at high level. I'm not sure that they actually are, but they're supposed to be.