D&D 2E (5e + PF2e)/2?

[fjw70]

To answer the OP’s question, what about 4e Essentials material? It’s pretty simple and tactical. Does it have enough options for you?

 

[dave2008]

So did this thread die?

Looks like it. Personally I’m busy with other things at the moment.

 

[dave2008]

To answer the OP’s question, what about 4e Essentials material? It’s pretty simple and tactical. Does it have enough options for you?

Possibly, we had a combination of both in our 4e group so I don’t remember what separated so much. They both had the numbers treadmill, but maybe adding a version of bounded accuracy and advantage/ disadvantage to essentials would do the trick.

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

Yes, CRs will go up which was the opposite of one of the original goals. But I was always basing that on the idea that the CR's "felt" right. I basically decided there is nothing magic about a particular CR.

Came to think of this. There is some magic about CRs. I feel that the monsters should stay at their published CR. That is, trolls are CR5. Period. The job is then making the monsters more challenging within the given CR.

Fx, just making the MM white dragons 'paragons' with more hp and perhaps more damage and upping their CR by two doesn't solve anything, imo. Then we just have Dave's alternate MM with higher CR versions of the MM monsters. Which is great, see here fx, but not really the aim, am I right?

 

[dave2008]

Came to think of this. There is some magic about CRs. I feel that the monsters should stay at their published CR. That is, trolls are CR5. Period. The job is then making the monsters more challenging within the given CR.

Fx, just making the MM white dragons 'paragons' with more hp and perhaps more damage and upping their CR by two doesn't solve anything, imo. Then we just have Dave's alternate MM with higher CR versions of the MM monsters. Which is great, see here fx, but not really the aim, am I right?

It was, but I am no longer convinced that is the simplest solution. Is fixing a troll at CR 5 and changing what CR 5 means really better then increasing its CR per the DMG and changing what a CR 5 encounter means?. Heck there are already official trolls with CR 6, 7, 9, 11 & 13!

For example, a theoretical "hardcore" Troll ( a troll Brute or whatever) would just be a troll with stronger and more interesting stats, a more challenging troll. I think it would be more confusing to give a more difficult troll the same CR as a regular troll. I mean if a DM already knows that CR 5 is a moderate challenge for their players, it could turn ugly for them if they pick a troll brute that is quite a bit tougher, but also listed at CR 5. This also helps create "minion" versions of monsters.

I get how you feel, I was there, and I haven't changed anything yet, but I just think the better option is what is most intuitive to others, not what feels right to me.

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

Well, isn't the most intuitive thing "monsters are the same CR, but are optimized" that you originally intended with your hardcore monsters? The whole point being that monsters of a given CR isn't the threat they're supposed to be.

 

[CapnZapp]

The simplest solution would be for WotC to errata CRs and update them for future printings of the MM.

Many demons should lose at least 1 CR, up to a third.

(Don't have the book here, but if a Nalfeshnee was CR 8 instead of CR 12(?) it could actually put fear into someone, much less hardened heroes...

 

[dave2008]

The simplest solution would be for WotC to errata CRs and update them for future printings of the MM.

Many demons should lose at least 1 CR, up to a third.

(Don't have the book here, but if a Nalfeshnee was CR 8 instead of CR 12(?) it could actually put fear into someone, much less hardened heroes...

Isn’t the simplest solution to revise the encounter guidelines? The only reason we think a CR 12 should be scary at any point is because the current guidelines tell us so.

 

[dave2008]

Well, isn't the most intuitive thing "monsters are the same CR, but are optimized" that you originally intended with your hardcore monsters? The whole point being that monsters of a given CR isn't the threat they're supposed to be.

I disagree. I think it’s counterintuitive to say one monster is more powerful than another and yet they are the same challenge which is what CR is supposed to represent.

I agree that monsters are not as challenging as they should be at the CR as listed but isn’t that really a function of the encounter guidelines that tell us when a certain CR should be a challenge? To me the simple solution is to change then CR guideline. And change our assumption about what CR represents in terms of a challenge.

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

I disagree. I think it’s counterintuitive to say one monster is more powerful than another and yet they are the same challenge which is what CR is supposed to represent.

Hey, it's what PC levels have been that way for multiple editions!

I agree that monsters are not as challenging as they should be at the CR as listed but isn’t really a function of the encounter guidelines that tell us when a certain CR should be a challenge? To me the simple solution is to change then Kara guideline. And change our assumption about what CR represents in terms of a challenge.

So something closer to 4E's one monster of x level(CR) equal to one PC of x level?