D&D 5E Monsters compared- new vs old versions

[Ath-kethin]

Is determining a monster's CR really a "20-step process?" Because if so, no wonder so few people bother. That strikes me as still a problem of the system regardless of the accuracy of the results!

There are actually over 20 steps in the DMG,, especially when calculating the impact for special features. But people look at the first chart, pull stuff off it, and get internet famous complaining about how the numbers don't match up to the creatures actual impact in combat.

I had a fun time with one guy on Twitter when I pointed out that the monster he was complaining about being overpowered for its CR actually worked out perfectly if you flow all the steps. His only defense was that "many people have proved" the math is wrong.

I asked how HIS calculations came up, when he flowed the steps himself, and he blocked me.

C'est la vie.

Update: he seems to have unblocked me now, but the point still stands.

I don't think that any system can have its encounter match accurately broken down to a single table. Not one with a worthwhile outcome anyway.

 

[ad_hoc]

There are actually over 20 steps in the DMG,, especially when calculating the impact for.special features. But people look at the first chart, pull stuff off it, and get internet famous complaining about how the numbers don't match up to the creatures actual impact in combat.

I had a fun time with one guy on Twitter when I pointed out that the monster he was complaining about being overpowered for its CR actually worked out perfectly if you flow all the steps. His only defense was that "many people have proved" the math is wrong.

I asked how HIS calculations came up, when he flowed the steps himself, and he blocked me.

C'est la vie.

Update: he seems to have unblocked me now, but the point still stands.

I don't think that any system can have its encounter match accurately broken down to a single table. Not one with a worthwhile outcome anyway.

Yeah, CR is just a warning sign about the creature's potential impact too.

The most important factor in all encounters is how the DM runs them. In my experience from hearing people complain online about how easy the game is, when asked for examples it becomes clear that they are the ones making it easy.

Needing an 18 passive investigation to avoid being surprised is a huge advantage for the creature. The CR bump is entirely justified.

 

[ad_hoc]

The old False Appearance did not increase the monster's CR which was a big mistake as they surprise PCs most of the time.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

The old False Appearance did not increase the monster's CR which was a big mistake as they surprise PCs most of the time.

Yes which is why it makes sense they weakened its attacks, as the old one was CR 9 equivalent.

 

[Dausuul]

There are actually over 20 steps in the DMG,, especially when calculating the impact for.special features. But people look at the first chart, pull stuff off it, and get internet famous complaining about how the numbers don't match up to the creatures actual impact in combat.

Those steps are for creating an entire monster from scratch, not calculating CR from an already-created statblock. For example, the first four steps are choosing the monster's 1) name, 2) size, 3) creature type, and 4) alignment.

Calculating the CR of an existing monster is fairly straightforward and not nearly as involved as you suggest.

 

[el-remmen]

I trust my DM experience to eyeball it and I find even messing it up on the fly preferable to whatever # steps.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Man, I thought this was gonna be a thread about monsters from earlier editions compared to now...

 

[ad_hoc]

I trust my DM experience to eyeball it and I find even messing it up on the fly preferable to whatever # steps.

I don't see anyone saying that to you.

What was criticized are the people who say that the published monsters don't align with the CR calculation as laid out in the DMG.

Well, if someone is going to make that claim, they should be following the steps and not just 'eyeballing' it.

(Also 20 steps sounds more involved than it really is. One of them is 'name the creature' and step 16 is 'determine final CR rating' so it's not even 20 steps to get to the CR rating.)

 

[the Jester]

Re: CR calculations. If you haven't done the full 20-step process in calculating a CR, your conclusion is almost definitely wrong. The monster math isn't perfect, but it's a hell of a lot closer than many people trumpet. Just looking at the first page of the process and making a call based on that is not how the system is designed to work.

While this is very often true, in this case, there's really not a lot that is modifying it. I'll buy the new version of False Appearance as a good candidate- otherwise, there's really nothing outside of the base stuff.

I'll move on to another monster that is reprinted in WBtW at some point in the next day or so, but first I'm going to do a few monster revisions of my own!

 

[el-remmen]

I don't see anyone saying that to you.

Huh? Saying what to me? . I was just saying 20 steps or even 10 are too many to be worth the time - at least to me - regardless of the outcome.