Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Xetheral" data-source="post: 9457654" data-attributes="member: 6802765">Personally, I ignore CR and don't worry about PC vs monster balance--the monsters and NPCs exist in my campaign world independently of the PCs. It's mostly up to the PCs in my campaigns to decide what to try to engage (at least until they provoke an NPC into hunting the party), and that includes trying to make sure that they're properly prepared if they're going to try to punch above their weight class.In my current campaign the PCs have mostly opted to backburner adventuring opportunities that would lead to dungeons (or dungeon analogues) with the potential for sequential combats, in favor of pursuing objectives they've deemed more urgent. Some of those objectives have been resolved without any combat--usually when the party was obviously more powerful than their opponents and could leverage that strength to achieve a non-violent resolution--and some of which have been resolved by the PCs hunting down and deliberately attacking the NPCs, either because eradication was their chosen objective or because the NPCs were too powerful to otherwise coerce. (The latter of which naturally leads to combat encounters far beyond what the DMG would classify as 'Deadly' if I was using CR.)My answer is 1 under either formulation of the question.And most of the spellcasting and other limited-use resource expenditure at my table is done out of combat, either in pursuit of non-combat objectives or when trying to set up a planned combat encounter to their own advantage.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Xetheral, post: 9457654, member: 6802765"] Personally, I ignore CR and don't worry about PC vs monster balance--the monsters and NPCs exist in my campaign world independently of the PCs. It's mostly up to the PCs in my campaigns to decide what to try to engage (at least until they provoke an NPC into hunting the party), and that includes trying to make sure that they're properly prepared if they're going to try to punch above their weight class. In my current campaign the PCs have mostly opted to backburner adventuring opportunities that would lead to dungeons (or dungeon analogues) with the potential for sequential combats, in favor of pursuing objectives they've deemed more urgent. Some of those objectives have been resolved without any combat--usually when the party was obviously more powerful than their opponents and could leverage that strength to achieve a non-violent resolution--and some of which have been resolved by the PCs hunting down and deliberately attacking the NPCs, either because eradication was their chosen objective or because the NPCs were too powerful to otherwise coerce. (The latter of which naturally leads to combat encounters far beyond what the DMG would classify as 'Deadly' if I was using CR.) My answer is 1 under either formulation of the question. And most of the spellcasting and other limited-use resource expenditure at my table is done out of combat, either in pursuit of non-combat objectives or when trying to set up a planned combat encounter to their own advantage. [/QUOTE]

Verification