bouncyhead
Explorer
Yup. And XP awards are self-correcting.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
How do you determain challenges?
- Thread starter HardcoreDandDGirl
- Start date
Belphanior
First Post
The CR system of 3.x did the job adequately, but broke down when the more unconventional PC classes and monsters entered the fray, especially in combination. Some specific monsters also broke the mold. Adventure is heavy on undead? A cleric will serve the party fine in combat, a rogue much less so. In general it still served as a rough guesstimate to work around.
The xp budget of 4e works better for this purpose because monsters and PCs alike are more generalized. One soldier might mark PCs, another might grab them, a third might slow them. But all of them serve the same general purpose: make it more attractive to attack them rather than others. And the rogue can do fine in the undead-adventure, even if he's not quite as useful as the cleric might be.
An obsession with DPR and DPC strikes me as entirely bizarre. That sort of thing might work for striker classes, and even then only up to a certain point. The strength of defenders, leaders, and controllers lies not in doing maximum damage output. Even strikers can do average damage if they make up for it with stunning, dazing, or other crippling effects.
The xp budget of 4e works better for this purpose because monsters and PCs alike are more generalized. One soldier might mark PCs, another might grab them, a third might slow them. But all of them serve the same general purpose: make it more attractive to attack them rather than others. And the rogue can do fine in the undead-adventure, even if he's not quite as useful as the cleric might be.
An obsession with DPR and DPC strikes me as entirely bizarre. That sort of thing might work for striker classes, and even then only up to a certain point. The strength of defenders, leaders, and controllers lies not in doing maximum damage output. Even strikers can do average damage if they make up for it with stunning, dazing, or other crippling effects.
Noumenon
First Post
I just wanted to mention that you can use an "XP budget" in 3.5 too. If you have a 5th level party and want a 6th level encounter, you can see on DMG 38 that it's 2250 XP. Just add up the XP for the monsters you want till you get to 2250. Like, a CR 3 for a 5th level party is 750 XP. Therefore, you can buy three CR 3s with your 2250 XP.
It's exactly the same results as on DMG 49 but I find it much much easier to do.
It's exactly the same results as on DMG 49 but I find it much much easier to do.
Stormtalon
First Post
Heck, I can't even imagine adjusting the content of a module based on spreadsheet calculations; the most I'll do is adjust for party size by tossing in an appropriate number of opponents of the right level -- but that's it.
Those theoretical calculations are good for discussing merits and flaws of classes outside the game (see the Wiz CharOp boards), but that's it -- they've got no practical place at the table. Players will play what they want to play, and as DM it's my job to cater to that.
I do know this -- if I had a DM admit to using that sorta spreadsheet to alter a published module based on these theoretical calculations, I'd leave the group immediately. Some of these modules are difficult enough without these additional theorycrafted adjustments made to them behind the scenes.
Primitive Screwhead
First Post
No, DPR and DPC are not the answer. The problem is that there is a large number of variables that just cannot be answered by spreadsheets or systems. That being said, I have been running a 4E War of the Burning Sky campaign for a number of months and have been using the DMG guidelines for building encounters. Generally I use the 'wolf-pack' or 'commander and troops' templates and custom built monsters. It takes maybe half an hour to prep for a session and the combats have been spot on.
However, my group is mostly made up of strikers... something I will have to adapt somewhat as we regain our two defender characters.
IMHO, the 4e guidelines are the best I have seen yet. 3x CR was a good start, but needed an artistic hand to get it right. The higher level got more and more fuzzy.
Vegepygmy
First Post
Same here. I think it's because I cut my gaming teeth on 1e (AD&D), where no such concept existed, and DMs had to develop a certain instinct for what constitutes an appropriate challenge.
But here's the really interesting thing I've noticed: some of my players who began with 3E and have only experienced the game with a CR system will actually calculate the CR of an encounter in the middle of the encounter, and if it's "too high," they'll start complaining about the inevitable TPK that's coming, even though they're winning the fight. They're so sure they can't win, in fact, that they start looking for escape routes, or going on total defense when they should be full attacking...and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy!
I think I hate the concept of challenge ratings (in any edition).
Majoru Oakheart
Adventurer
It is possible to get it close to correct. I will echo some of the things other people have said before hand. You can guess that a particular encounter LIKELY won't kill people, but there is always a chance.
I find that CR worked...roughly. There were certain monsters who were just way too powerful or underpowered for their CR. They were labeled CR 5 but should have been CR 8 or 9...or vice versa. And because of the way the math worked in 3e, a particular monster could be as tough as a CR 5 against a party with a Wizard and as tough as a CR 10 without a Wizard in the party. Because one number(like say, AC) could be much, much higher than the average monster of its CR while another number(like say, Will Save) could be way lower than normal. But, the system was better than guessing randomly. Like what you had to do in 1e/2e.
4e XP system works pretty well. Although, it can strain if you push it really far. Like deciding to use the entire XP budget on 1 really high level standard monster as an entire encounter rather than using a lower level solo monster. But if you recognize that all monsters really should be +/- 4 levels, it works well. Magic items make a fairly big difference as well. If most of the party has +2 items at second level, they'll probably be able to take another level higher monster.
As for the spreadsheets. It is possible to go that far. I'm naturally mathematically inclined, so I look at these things myself. I have a number of friends who do as well. We're not as bad as the people you've listed. We're accepting of any class. On the other hand, if someone showed up with a Rogue with 14 Dex, we'd likely recommend over and over again that they change characters to one that was better. I certainly don't agree that Paladins are below the curve. DPR is not the only thing in the game.
I find that CR worked...roughly. There were certain monsters who were just way too powerful or underpowered for their CR. They were labeled CR 5 but should have been CR 8 or 9...or vice versa. And because of the way the math worked in 3e, a particular monster could be as tough as a CR 5 against a party with a Wizard and as tough as a CR 10 without a Wizard in the party. Because one number(like say, AC) could be much, much higher than the average monster of its CR while another number(like say, Will Save) could be way lower than normal. But, the system was better than guessing randomly. Like what you had to do in 1e/2e.
4e XP system works pretty well. Although, it can strain if you push it really far. Like deciding to use the entire XP budget on 1 really high level standard monster as an entire encounter rather than using a lower level solo monster. But if you recognize that all monsters really should be +/- 4 levels, it works well. Magic items make a fairly big difference as well. If most of the party has +2 items at second level, they'll probably be able to take another level higher monster.
As for the spreadsheets. It is possible to go that far. I'm naturally mathematically inclined, so I look at these things myself. I have a number of friends who do as well. We're not as bad as the people you've listed. We're accepting of any class. On the other hand, if someone showed up with a Rogue with 14 Dex, we'd likely recommend over and over again that they change characters to one that was better. I certainly don't agree that Paladins are below the curve. DPR is not the only thing in the game.
Similar Threads
