Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ProgBard" data-source="post: 6781342" data-attributes="member: 6803722">According to the monster-building rules, the proficiency bonus for a monster or NPC is based on its challenge rating. As I read it, this number becomes something that you only finalize after doing all the rest of the calculations for CR.So, all you monster and (especially) NPC designers, how closely do you feel you have to adhere to this? Do you follow the guidelines as written, or set proficiency independently - maybe even as one factor that determines CR rather than is dependent on it?I find myself tempted to more or less decouple them myself. I'm working on a set of generic-ish NPCs to expand the list in the MM, especially to represent NPC versions of PC-like characters. I realize that characters with class levels are supposed to be "special," but - given that determining CR is almost entirely dependent on 1) how badly something can hurt you, and 2) how hard it is to kill - relegating all humanoid characters who aren't combat monsters or fireball-slingers to the low end of the proficiency scale seems dumb and doesn't model story very well. It feels silly that the loremaster bard the PCs might go to for knowledge on some obscure bit of arcana needs like a zillion hit dice just to get bumped out of the same +2 that every neophyte adventurer gets; OTOH, it feels very much like RAW, and likely RAI, means exactly that, and I suppose it may well be for some very good reason that I have not the arithmetics to savvy.Arguments? Agreements? Advice? Answers?</blockquote>

Verification