Dynamic Challenge Ratings

[Kynn]

This sounds like a good suggestion for a 3.x game but I sincerely hope that the concept of "CR" will be dumped in 5e.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I'd like there to be some guidance about how tough a monster is - wouldn't you? 4e has monster level, 3e has challenge rating, earlier editions have hit dice... is this a bad thing all of a sudden? Or is there something else you mean that you don't like?

To be clear, I don't think something like challenge rating or monster level should be the sole determining factor to help DMs build encounters. Terrain, PC abilities, monster synergy, etc. should all be considered. But having some kind of number to help DMs understand just how nasty that ogre is in comparison to that goblin is helpful, at least to me.

I think there's probably a role for some table somewhere that has an estimated level equivalent or something for monsters. A beginning DM needs to understand that an illithid will slaughter a level 1 party and that a goblin might be more appropriate as an encounter. An advanced DM needs some sense of heirarchy to apply to new monsters as they come out. But it's really just a vague guideline, it shouldn't be mentioned much or in the monster stat block.

CR as a hard rule just doesn't work (which is why this thread was started). There's no way to take into account party makeup, DM choices, let alone rules options in an option-heavy system.

Hit dice is a substantive number that does something (determines the creature's toughness and skill, like level); not the same thing. Monsters should have a level. But it's hard to say that a level 5 monster should be in any way balanced with a level 5 PC; their abilities are so diverse.

The bottom line is, as always, that balance is the DM's job, not the game writers'. The writers just provide tools, and frankly I don't find CR a useful tool.