Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6560808" data-attributes="member: 6696971">I think the analogy maps well enough from an engineering perspective.Speaking of CR in 3.x and 5e, one of the primary culprits is limited use abilities of which access is balanced over the course of the adventuring day (for PCs).&nbsp; When these limited use abilities are then granted to creatures whose totality of existence is measured in rounds (maybe 3, +/- 1) rather than encounters/day, things are bound to go pear-shaped when they are deployed.&nbsp; Further, the embedded considerations of preparing and managing loadout (for an NPC spellcaster) becomes another problem because the need for versatility and preparedness/endurance over the course of an adventuring day (and its potentially myriad variety of challenges) is rendered null when the action economy of your entire existence is 3-4 (standard) actions.Then, of course, you have the other problems outlined above; creatures of such extremely narrow fields of potency.&nbsp; If they're deployed by the GM under circumstance x, they're deadly....while if they're deployed under circumstance y/the party is capable of implementing Monster Neutering Strategic Protocol 0013, they're curbstomp material.It doesn't have to work this way.&nbsp; You can have awesome monsters/NPCs, with deep variance in theme and mode of operation, that carry a predictable (GM-side) level of challenge.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 6560808, member: 6696971"] I think the analogy maps well enough from an engineering perspective. Speaking of CR in 3.x and 5e, one of the primary culprits is limited use abilities of which access is balanced over the course of the adventuring day (for PCs). When these limited use abilities are then granted to creatures whose totality of existence is measured in rounds (maybe 3, +/- 1) rather than encounters/day, things are bound to go pear-shaped when they are deployed. Further, the embedded considerations of preparing and managing loadout (for an NPC spellcaster) becomes another problem because the need for versatility and preparedness/endurance over the course of an adventuring day (and its potentially myriad variety of challenges) is rendered null when the action economy of your entire existence is 3-4 (standard) actions. Then, of course, you have the other problems outlined above; creatures of such extremely narrow fields of potency. If they're deployed by the GM under circumstance x, they're deadly....while if they're deployed under circumstance y/the party is capable of implementing Monster Neutering Strategic Protocol 0013, they're curbstomp material. It doesn't have to work this way. You can have awesome monsters/NPCs, with deep variance in theme and mode of operation, that carry a predictable (GM-side) level of challenge. [/QUOTE]

Verification