D&D 5E Why are 5E Giants Huge size?

[Upper_Krust]

These tend to be very weak for their CR

They do generally tend to be weak its weird. For instance a Solar needs to use 2 legendary actions to perform an attack that is much weaker than its basic sword attack.

(except my Rune Giants - I converted a reasonable-looking Legendary stat block to non-Legendary, but it made for massively OP damage output when it could all be done on their own turn).

Yes you created a legit CR 27 monster then assumed it was CR 22...result, party gets rekt.

 

[dave2008]

I think the higher the monster CR the greater the potential deviation from the DMG listed average stats for each CR. That's certainly one factor.

Also most DMs won't go all out at focus a Solo Monster's fire on a single PC.

Focus fire can be deadly, often PC groups don't always work as a team when facing multiple threats, whereas with a solo monster they 'can't not' work as a team.

I agree with all of this.

True but you could probably make a case that all CR13+ monsters should have them in some capacity.

I guess, but I think that would be a mistake. LA monsters are more complex to run and having multiple ones in a fight becomes cumbersome really fast.

Why monsters like the Planetar, Balor and Pit Fiend don't have them is a mystery.

I can see it both ways. As noted above, if you want to have a battle with multiple planetars and pit fiends, then not having LA is a blessing.

Legendary Actions (not counted as part of the monsters overall DPR as per page 274 of the DMG) do help redress some of the balance though.

Any damage in the LA is counted in the DPR though. The think they really do is let the monster get some attacks in through out the round and make the fight more interesting.

If the DMG page 274 says a CR 16 monster should have this average AC, HP and Damage but the listed monster only has 70% the hp and 80% the damage output then its not really living up to its CR. The higher the monsters the more they deviate. Orcus is listed as CR 26 but is probably CR 20-21 for instance.

I find the MM tend to be pretty close. If not spot on, within 1 CR of the DMG. I will check Orcus specifically in a separate post.

 

[Upper_Krust]

IDK, the pit fiend is pretty tough. I haven't really checked as a whole though.

The supposedly CR 20 Pit Fiend has 79% of the listed CR 20 hit points and deals 59% of the average damage for a CR 20. The Pit Fiend stats in the Monster Manual are probably closer to CR 14.

 

[S'mon]

I guess, but I think that would be a mistake. LA monsters are more complex to run and having multiple ones in a fight becomes cumbersome really fast.

I do think that for Epic Tier (17-20) play, it's important to be able to have multiple tough/high-CR enemies. I'm not sure that making pit fiends & balors CR 20 non-legendary was the best approach, personally I'd rather go back to 1e norms and make the baseline ones more like CR 13 or so.

 

[S'mon]

The supposedly CR 20 Pit Fiend has 79% of the listed CR 20 hit points and deals 59% of the average damage for a CR 20. The Pit Fiend stats in the Monster Manual are probably closer to CR 14.

Yeah, so the non-Legendary high CR monsters in the MM do actually tend to work ok as "Epic Tier Orcs", because they are under-statted for their CRs. The downside is simply that they generate too much XP for their threat level.

Conversely when Kobold Press make a "CR 20" monster, it does actually tend to be a moderate challenge for a level 20 party. But they do this with stats that are much tougher than the MM creatures.

 

[Upper_Krust]

I guess, but I think that would be a mistake. LA monsters are more complex to run and having multiple ones in a fight becomes cumbersome really fast.

Of course but its unlikely you would have fights with multiple monsters of CR 13 or better. Which of course circles us back to Monsters living up to their Challenge Rating which virtually no monster in the Monster Manual does.

Additionally my suggestion of Legendary Actions = Proficiency Bonus -4, means 1 at CR 13-16, 2 at CR 17-20, 3 at CR 21-24 etc.

I can see it both ways. As noted above, if you want to have a battle with multiple planetars and pit fiends, then not having LA is a blessing.

When you have CR effective Planetars and Pit Fiends with Legendary Actions you won't need to use multiples of them.

Any damage in the LA is counted in the DPR though.

Still on the fence about whether that's necessarily a good thing - monsters are already too weak as it is (as people here keep mentioning).

The think they really do is let the monster get some attacks in through out the round and make the fight more interesting.

I find the MM tend to be pretty close. If not spot one, within 1 CR of the DMG. I will check Orcus specifically in a separate post.

I haven't seen a monster (in the Monster Manual) of CR 13 or higher yet that wasn't about 20% or more down on its CR.

 

[dave2008]

The higher the monsters the more they deviate. Orcus is listed as CR 26 but is probably CR 20-21 for instance.

Orcus CR check

Defensive CR:
HP = 405 x 1.25 (immunities) + 90 (legendary resistance) = 596.25 EHP
AC = 20 (with wand) + 2(saving throws) + 2 (magic resistance) = 24

Defensive CR subtotal = 27

Offensive CR
DPR = 158 (2 wands & 3 tails)
Attack bonus = 17 (average of all attack bonuses)

Offensive CR subtotal = 24

DMG Total CR = 25.5 (27+24/2)

Seems pretty close to the CR 26 listed to me. And that doesn't account for it being able to summon 500 HP of undead warriors if needed.

Now a few issues. The DMG provides guidance for applying the resistance and immunities multiplier to HP, but it doesn't say you have too. I think a 1.25 multiplier for this high CR is a bit much, but it has immunity to 4 conditions and 3 damage types (lumping b,p, & s as one), so it feels justified to apply the lowest option provided by the DMG (and WotC seems to agree). Also, I often find that the MM rounds up fractional CRs, when I think they should round down, but as far as I know there is not guidance on this in the DMG. I would list Orucs as a CR 25, but the Wand of Orcus probably justifies the higher CR.

 

[Upper_Krust]

I do think that for Epic Tier (17-20) play, it's important to be able to have multiple tough/high-CR enemies. I'm not sure that making pit fiends & balors CR 20 non-legendary was the best approach, personally I'd rather go back to 1e norms and make the baseline ones more like CR 13 or so.

Its rules bloat all over again. They keep upping the Balor and Pit Fiend in each edition. Albeit in 5E they forgot to stat them appropriately.

The Listed Balor has the Hit Points of a CR 13 monster and the Damage of a CR 11 monster.
The Listed Pit Fiend has the Hit Points and Damage of a CR 16 creature.

 

[dave2008]

Of course but its unlikely you would have fights with multiple monsters of CR 13 or better. Which of course circles us back to Monsters living up to their Challenge Rating which virtually no monster in the Monster Manual does.

Why not? My level 15 party definitely has, and more than once.

Additionally my suggestion of Legendary Actions = Proficiency Bonus -4, means 1 at CR 13-16, 2 at CR 17-20, 3 at CR 21-24 etc.

Sure, but that doesn't change anything really. FYI some monsters have different numbers of legendary actions already.

When you have CR effective Planetars and Pit Fiends with Legendary Actions you won't need to use multiples of them.

But what if you want too? I want my truly epic monsters to be tougher, but planetars and pit fiends, not so much.

Still on the fence about whether that's necessarily a good thing - monsters are already too weak as it is (as people here keep mentioning).

I agree monsters can be too weak, but not counting LA damage would make no sense to me. Just make monsters a higher CR. Issue solved.

I haven't seen a monster (in the Monster Manual) of CR 13 or higher yet that wasn't about 20% or more down on its CR.

I just checked Orcus (see the separate post) and he comes in at CR 25.5 (aka 26) so it is pretty spot on. Also, though I don't like the dragon designs very much, they also come in as CR appropriate or high on their CR. I think you are probably not checking the full DMG guidelines in your analysis as I find they are fairly accurate.

 

[dave2008]

Its rules bloat all over again. They keep upping the Balor and Pit Fiend in each edition. Albeit in 5E they forgot to stat them appropriately.

The Listed Balor has the Hit Points of a CR 13 monster and the Damage of a CR 11 monster

The big problem with the balor is the death explosion has a huge effect on its CR. IF you take that out it is a much lower CR)