D&D 5E (2024) Are you a DM struggling to build challenging but fair encounters

[phuong]

Apparently most DMs struggle to build good encounters, or do they?

 

[payn]

I don't mind a CR thats a little more like horseshoes and handgernades. I find combat can be a little less predictable that way, and the door is cracked for PCs to be clever and punch above their weight. This can lead to disappointing encounters as you gain a feel for it. I do recognize that many folks do not want to feel anything. They want the numbers to work with clear accuracy as provided and thats understandable. I do think the complaints can be overstated at times. Possibly folks are just taking 3E/PF1 experiences and amplifying the issues they have with 5E, however, I think all of them are much more manageable in 5E and its not a bad system, just not a preferential fit. YMMV.

 

[ART!]

I picked "No I can build 5e encounters as a DM just fine and they are fun and work how I want them to work", but only because it's the closest to how I feel about the topic.

I don't pay much attention to CRs, and using D&D Beyond's encounter builder has only helped me not pay much attention to them. I just kind of go with my instincts at this point when it comes to gauging how hard an encounter should and will be.

The other thing that using DDB's encounter builder has made me realize is how little support there is in the game for anything other than combat. I'd love to see an encounter builder for social encounters, exploration challenges, something for downtime activities, and the like.

 

[tetrasodium]

Apparently most DMs struggle to build good encounters, or do they?

You forgot an option for "I dm 5e but problems for other reasons" or similar I find that 5e monsters tend to be built for a small party of lower level under equipped (ie starting gear only) so that breaks down at higher levels (ie tier3 or late tier2) & with larger groups. Tools like flat DR and spell resistance that used to help with the impact of a large group are lacking

 

[aco175]

I have no problems since I do not bother with CR. I make encounters that I think are about right and find some are a bit easy and others a bit harder than expected. The players react how they see fit.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

This poll could do with a few extra options. I play with published material and found encounters fine up to about 7th level. I have never checked if the published encounters use the DMG guidelines.
From level 7 to 14 the published encounters drift away from party capability, and I compensated by activating nearby encounters as reinforcements and tweaking the boss fights.
After that it was largely guesswork and I have not had to opportunity for another go. So I have learned stuff I am not sure if it is enough.
I voted the first option.

 

[Clint_L]

Ummm...none of those options? Like pretty much every DM, I often struggle to build challenging but fair encounters because my players are so damn unpredictable, bless! I don't think it's the CR's fault, though, I think it's just that the game is super complex and what may be a deadly encounter for one group due to composition, strategy, luck, etc., might be a breeze for another. Last week I ran an encounter that one beginner group walked through like it was nothing; I am running the same one with a different group today and we'll see how it goes.

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

No, I can build 5e encounters as a DM just fine and sometimes they are even fun, but sometimes they do not work how I want them to work.

 

[Nikosandros]

I can build good encounters by mostly ignoring the CR system.

 

[Charlaquin]

CR is flawed, but mostly functional. If you use it as a guideline but allow yourself to tune things above or below its guidelines as feels appropriate, you end up with pretty good encounters. I think the system has a lot of room for improvement, but it will never be truly precise because it just can’t possibly account for all possible variables.