Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6785830" data-attributes="member: 996">I did.That was kind of the heart of the complaint I was addressing: that you couldn't.&nbsp; A 3.x CR 5 monster was meant to be a 'speed bump' challenge for a level 5 party, by itself.&nbsp; Sometimes it was, sometimes it wasn't (in either direction).&nbsp; Two CR 5 monsters were supposed to be a similar challenge for a level 7 party, and 4 for a level 9.&nbsp; That got even less certain.&nbsp; But, if all you looked at was that hypothetical CR, you'd have some CR 11 monsters that put up a tough fight, and some that folded instantly, and you'd be wondering how anyone could published such an fdup sub-system.&nbsp; CR, alone, can't do everything 3.5 expected of it.5e doesn't quite depend as exclusively on CR, either.&nbsp; There are some monsters of a given CR that have a lot more hps than others - 'bosses.'&nbsp; And, there are Legendary monsters.&nbsp; So you have some nuance beyond just that one CR number.&nbsp; Always the case, if you feel the need to, and especially if you do so unadvisedly.&nbsp; 4e, for all the controversy and edition warring, though, was a fairly clear little system, and didn't really cry out for house rules, re-skinning was very often all you needed.&nbsp; 5e, OTOH, cries out for 'rulings' from the get-go, it's very DM-Empowering, that way, which is one of it's greatest strengths.&nbsp; It also makes any 'guidelines' pretty rough, because you're going to be making rulings that'll essentially fine-tune 'em, anyway.&nbsp; In essence, 5e doesn't need CR to be dependable as level/role was, just like it doesn't need mechanical class balance, because all that is stuff the DM is free to work with, himself, and tune to the needs of his players &amp; campaign.Nod, more dependable than either version of CR, but still just a guideline:&nbsp; player choices, the environs of the battle, and how the DM chose to run the enemies could all make a big difference.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6785830, member: 996"] I did. That was kind of the heart of the complaint I was addressing: that you couldn't. A 3.x CR 5 monster was meant to be a 'speed bump' challenge for a level 5 party, by itself. Sometimes it was, sometimes it wasn't (in either direction). Two CR 5 monsters were supposed to be a similar challenge for a level 7 party, and 4 for a level 9. That got even less certain. But, if all you looked at was that hypothetical CR, you'd have some CR 11 monsters that put up a tough fight, and some that folded instantly, and you'd be wondering how anyone could published such an fdup sub-system. CR, alone, can't do everything 3.5 expected of it. 5e doesn't quite depend as exclusively on CR, either. There are some monsters of a given CR that have a lot more hps than others - 'bosses.' And, there are Legendary monsters. So you have some nuance beyond just that one CR number. Always the case, if you feel the need to, and especially if you do so unadvisedly. 4e, for all the controversy and edition warring, though, was a fairly clear little system, and didn't really cry out for house rules, re-skinning was very often all you needed. 5e, OTOH, cries out for 'rulings' from the get-go, it's very DM-Empowering, that way, which is one of it's greatest strengths. It also makes any 'guidelines' pretty rough, because you're going to be making rulings that'll essentially fine-tune 'em, anyway. In essence, 5e doesn't need CR to be dependable as level/role was, just like it doesn't need mechanical class balance, because all that is stuff the DM is free to work with, himself, and tune to the needs of his players & campaign. Nod, more dependable than either version of CR, but still just a guideline: player choices, the environs of the battle, and how the DM chose to run the enemies could all make a big difference. [/QUOTE]

Verification