D&D 5E First-hand experience with the DMG rules for creating/modifying monsters and NPCs

[Li Shenron]

In my experience, the system tends to overrate monsters at the higher CRs and underrate them at the lower CRs. That is, if the DMG system tells you your monster is CR 15, it's probably closer to 10, and if it tells you the CR is 2, it's probably closer to 3 or 4.

That's exactly the kind of observations I was looking for, thanks!

 

[Li Shenron]

I tend to use a lot of elemental monsters and for longevity I simply add or subtract HP.

Ok. I am not sure whether this should be considered a major or minor modification to monsters, it's certainly very easy to do (you don't really need any rules to just change HP), but it also clearly affects the difficulty (at least if the HP difference is large enough).

So you say that when you do this, you don't check if the CR has changed. Do you adjust the XP gained? If so, do you do that proportionally e.g. double HP = double XP? This is probably not really the most important thing, but in general I think that a double-HP monster is less powerfule than 2 monsters of the same kind (because they get twice the actions in a round).

 

[Sunseeker]

[MENTION=63245]Evenglare[/MENTION] have you tried to create a monster/NPC or modify an existing monster using the DMG rules, and then used it in an adventure already? How did the monster/NPC worked out?

As Evenglare pointed out, the rules are needlessly complex, even without many of the additional complexities 3.5 had. I found the rules cumbersome and time consuming to come up with a "proper" monster, so I just winged it with something that mirrored my players general damage output and defenses.

 

[Li Shenron]

Done all three multiple times.

Mind you, only for Tier 1 level opponents (CR ≤5)... And it generates the CR's listed in the MM, as well, generally. Those work well at low levels with no magic.

Ok! I think it's actually better to get some input on this topic when magic items are not involved, so that we have a little less variables involved.

From your observations, I get that the DMG monsters creation/modification rules are consistent with the CR system and the monsters in the MM.

Can you tell us how far did you go with relation to monsters complexity? With this I mean, did you create monsters with similar complexity to the MM monsters (e.g. number of special abilities, special actions, spells...), or have you also tried to make more complex monsters (or add special stuff to existing monsters)? Did the CR estimation system hold when increasing complexity, or did it seem to breakdown.

 

[miniaturehoarder]

It works OK, won't replace playtesting.

 

[miniaturehoarder]

Ok! I think it's actually better to get some input on this topic when magic items are not involved, so that we have a little less variables involved.

From your observations, I get that the DMG monsters creation/modification rules are consistent with the CR system and the monsters in the MM.

Can you tell us how far did you go with relation to monsters complexity? With this I mean, did you create monsters with similar complexity to the MM monsters (e.g. number of special abilities, special actions, spells...), or have you also tried to make more complex monsters (or add special stuff to existing monsters)? Did the CR estimation system hold when increasing complexity, or did it seem to breakdown.

Most times adding complexity to a monster doesn't affect too much. CR is calculated based on the most effective offence hitting on round 1, 2 & 3, not how many options a critter has. CR is calculated on AC & HP, not how fast or how it moves (unless it flies and ranged attacks at under CR10). You can add spells and special abilities to many demons without affecting CR much if at all for example; if you are mindful about flight and keep the spells from being more damaging than the demon's full attack.

Most obnoxious thing on the CRing tables, is there's not a listing for Paralysis on hit from what I can see. Many riders don't modify CR, but I'd expect that one to do so based on the Ghoul's CR.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I don't have the DMG yet but I know that it has rules for creating or modifying both monsters and NPCs. Who has already tried out these rules, and how did they work?

Most importantly, did you find these rules to reasonably estimate the CR and level of the resulting monsters/NPCs?

Please specify which one of these have you tried out:

- create a monster from scratch
- modify an existing monster
- create an NPC from scratch

I guess that for the latter there are multiple options e.g. using class levels or not.

I've done all three many times, and I've found the DMG rules easy and effective, at least when combined with a modicum of common sense. While I've read the entire section, I mostly just reference the Monster Statistics by CR grid, and that makes it dirt simple to do. (I only need to reference the other grids if I'm adding weapon resistance or whacky abilities.)

Typically I'll decide what CR I want to make, decide what offensive and defensive statistics are appropriate using the aforementioned grid, and then flesh out the rest based on my concept from there. No more difficult than the system in 4th, which I also found very simple. Although when I created a warlock NPC I worked the other way, creating the NPC first and then calculating its CR.

For a simple monster with only one or two abilities, it only takes a few minutes (largely a matter of writing everything down). Admittedly, the warlock took longer, but even after paring down its options it still had a lot of options by MM standards.

Overall, I feel it works pretty well.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

To me the monster creation system is as needlessly complicated as it was in 3e. I really was hoping for 4e style simplicity for monsters. Instead here you have to figure out their attack, defense, HP etc. Then locate them on a table and then average them to get a CR... actually on second thought I'll concede that its a bit simpler than 3.x but not nearly as much as I would have liked. (snip)

This was very much my experience as well... and, ultimately, I just gave up. It was too much work for too little reward. Sure, not as bad a 3.xE but, compared to 4E, it was non-productive. If I go back to 5E I will just be using published stat blocks.

[MENTION=63245]Evenglare[/MENTION] have you tried to create a monster/NPC or modify an existing monster using the DMG rules, and then used it in an adventure already? How did the monster/NPC worked out?

I did all three things you mentioned over a couple of days preparing for my first few sessions of 5E. Besides taking the rules for a proper drive in play, I wanted to see what custom monsters felt like in play as I have a preference for creating my own. Not any more. I'll just use published stat blocks.

 

[aramis erak]

Ok! I think it's actually better to get some input on this topic when magic items are not involved, so that we have a little less variables involved.

From your observations, I get that the DMG monsters creation/modification rules are consistent with the CR system and the monsters in the MM.

Can you tell us how far did you go with relation to monsters complexity? With this I mean, did you create monsters with similar complexity to the MM monsters (e.g. number of special abilities, special actions, spells...), or have you also tried to make more complex monsters (or add special stuff to existing monsters)? Did the CR estimation system hold when increasing complexity, or did it seem to breakdown.

I modified full-up monsters by adding powers, and recalculating from scratch.

Demi-medusae was a two step - one, figure out the missing term for the medusa's gaze, then port it to less dangerous bodies. Since the medusa only has the one "odd power" not covered on the table, it was easily enough figured.

And, within Tier 1, yes, it works fine. The CR/XP system works quite well at predicting whether or not a tier one party is going to need a healer in combat or not. Flukes can and do happen, such as the assassin getting surprised by the PC assassin with captured poison, and then rolling max damage and thus doing some 70 points in one hit... (1d8 weapon, +3d6 Sneak Attack, +3d6 poison, all doubled for crit, +5 from dex, and a σ≥4 roll).

 

[Remathilis]

I've messed around with it, but haven't put any of my creations into play (yet).

My guideline for making/modifying a monster. Find something in the MM that is similar to your concept. (Generally, I would find something roughly around the CR you want and the general type (fiend, undead, giant) and size you want. Swap out abilities using the DMG guidelines. Tinker with the numbers (ability scores, HD, and attacks) as you want. When done, compare the new monsters CR to the old one and see if it looks similiar. Keep in mind the following:

* Lots of abilities cost "0" for the CR modifier; the biggest glaring example is attack riders like paralysis (ghouls) or disease (rats). DM judgement needs to come into play; a creature with 6 attacks all causing paralysis (with a high save DC) is a TPK, no matter what the CR system says.
* Monster CR tends to be high on attack, low on defense (glass cannons). Exceptions exist, but the common monster attacks 2-4 CRs over his CR, and has the AC/Hp of a monster 2-4 levels lower than his CR.
* The tables only emphasize the combat pillar; specifically hit/attacks and AC/defense. Other areas are given limited value.
* The tables cannot save a DM from himself; as others have said it is possible to make horribly broken monsters "legally" using the table. Its not a point-buy system, its a guestimation system.

In essence, they are there to see if said monster will TPK your party instantly if they get into melee with it, it doesn't actually measure said creature's appropriateness against a typical D&D party.