Dragonlance Dragonlance Shadow of the Dragon Queen shows up in the wild!

[Paul Farquhar]

A well-designed encounter will support the narrative AND be tactically fun.

 

[Delazar]

Every 1st edition cleric wore heavy armor until Goldmoon. Mechanically, it was simply better. Dex clerics didn't become viable until 3rd edition.

When we played the original modules, Goldmoon switched to plate pretty fast. I remember a scene between Laurana's and Goldmoon's players

L: that's so ... que-shu... you need my elven tailor!
G: ...

 

[Paul Farquhar]

5E gives GMs no help in this regard.

I'm not sure what help they could give, other than "ignore CR, you can only learn this through experience".

 

[Thommy H-H]

It's kind of by-the-by, but the base Death Knight in the MM (which this Soth statblock is very much just an enhanced version of) is the swingiest of swingy monsters in a game already renowned for its swingy combat! It's high CR is weighted almost entirely on its offensive side, thanks to its one round of 140 average damage. Confusingly though, some of the rest of the damage in its DPR calculation has to come from a very specific combination of spells, upcast in quite specific ways. So it's both too damaging and not damaging enough for its offensive CR, if you don't grock the non-intuitive way to use it post dropping the Hellfire Orb in turn one.

When I used it recently, I brought it into line with the current statblocks and turned all its smites and weapon buffing spells into extra necrotic damage on its sword, after reverse engineering the entire thing. But it was still swingy: I hellfire orbed a level 13 party in the first turn and took half of them out, but once they closed, the death knight was mincemeat. It needs minions! (In this case, it was only a relatively incidental encounter: the death knight wasn't a named NPC, he was just guarding the lair of an atropal, which the party proceeded to easily overcome despite the buffs I gave it from its ToA stats...)

All of which is to say: yeah, CR is quite a granular system, particularly for monsters who rely on very particular circumstances to punch at their weight. But that's D&D.

 

[Reynard]

Not to me. The story of the world is more important than play imo.

I mean, you should engage the game how you want and all that, but to me it is a game first, and therefore play experience (part of which is of course story) is more important. There are few things more disappointing that a bad guy getting talked up for weeks or months only for them to end up being a sack of hit points carrying a rocket launcher, mechanically speaking.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

This is a buffed Death Knight I made for an adventure. And he wasn't particularly challenging for a level 16 party. And yes, it was based on the Icewind Dale CRPG. Same character, but different story.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Not to me. The story of the world is more important than play imo.

on the other hand I will take fun play over the story anyday (although I do WANT the story to work too it is just a second standard)

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I think they are talking about a character with a similar theme to Goldmoon, not stating her as a warlock.

Every 1st edition cleric wore heavy armor until Goldmoon. Mechanically, it was simply better. Dex clerics didn't become viable until 3rd edition.

I would say most... even if Mechanically they were worse, I saw plenty of robe wearing clerics that didn't want to melee in 2e. My buddy that tells the stories of his uncle in 1e has some character sheets from back then and a set of them (a whole party) had twin priestesses wearing no armor and they were level 7 and 6.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Since the adventure doesn't go up to anything close to level 19, it's not a relevant question.

Does the adventure list level limit at all?

 

[dave2008]

Either. Both.

The CR guidelines are, IMO, fairly straight forward. However, they are lengthy and involved so I think people just look at the table. If you just look at the table things will seem wildly off. Also, even veteran designers use the table wrong (I've had long arguments with Mike Myler about the correct way to adjust offensive an defensive CR based on the table). The important thing to remember is that beyond HP, AC, DPR and attack bonus, there are many things that affect CR:

• resistances and immunities
• number of saving throw proficiencies
• monster traits/features

Regarding resistances and immunities: the DMG provides some nuance in how to impact CR. First, the monster needs to have 3 or more "damage" resistances or immunities (condition immunities don't count) to even consider apply the HP modifications table. Even then, the DMG suggests that you should look at your group to determine if this really applies or not. So don't apply this formal if the monster has force, radiant, and cold resistance and no one in your group inflicts those damage types.

Regarding monster traits/features: This is a 2-page table in the DMG with monster traits & features and how the modify the CR calculation. This has not been updated since the DMG came out. There are many traits that have been added since. You have to do your best to compare new traits vs old ones and adjust accordingly (I hope this get's updated in the '24 DMG).

Now, I can go through this with you step-by-step if you want. However, this online calculator does a good job of doing the work for you if you check all the boxes and can calculate DPR: Monster CR Calculator

On thing about the online calculator, the resistance & immunities adjustment is just an on/off toggle. You have to determine when to turn it on (see my notes above).

So in summary, I find that issues people have are:

1. The don't adjust offensive and defensive CR correctly from the table based in the difference between actual and expected AC & attack bonus.
2. People don't calculate DPR correctly
3. People don't modify the CR calculation based on # of saving throws.
4. People don't modify the CR calculation based on the monsters traits/features.