D&D General How you think CR should work

[Oofta]

Thanks for the detailed response.

That’s a big deal, especially for non-standard sized groups.

Yeah, they feel more like solos. I used to just throw in more support troops which can work as well. I still either have support or environmental factors on the side of the legendary, there's just not much you can do when the entire group can focus fire.

Player equivalent level seems to be doing the heavy lifting. And the numbers don’t quite come out in any obvious way.

There's a bit of math going on and a couple of charts used for calculation. When I used to use use WOTC's math I'd ignore the number multiplier which seemed to help. When I plug things into the DndBeyond encounter builder, a lot of my fights come up deadly.

The next question, if you don’t mind, is: how tactically the players play and how optimized are they? And how do you account for that? My assumption for the last bit is that’s the variable of you adding levels to better match the players at your table.

They're okay at tactics but not great, probably about average for experienced players or a bit under. They also aren't glowing like Christmas trees especially for their level and they used point buy. As mentioned above for previous groups I've adjusted based on the group's effectiveness. The difficulty level is just based on a percentage in the spreadsheet so you can adjust category bands as needed or, because I'm lazy, just add a level or 2 to the PCs.

It's still not magic, but in general I find it useful. There's always going to be some fudging based on setting and how well monsters synergize. As always the dice can swing encounters in unexpected ways as well.

 

[Maxperson]

CR as a singular number can't work. But there is no need to account for every variable possible, because that's impractical if not impossible, and most importantly not useful.

CR should function as:

CR should go away and the DMG should just teach DMs how to accurately gauge the group to a monster in the book.

 

[Maxperson]

Max hit points for monsters? What are some of the most common numbers fixes you do?

As a complete aside, I get called Max way too often. While I was scrolling down this caught my eye and wanted to see what was being said about me.

 

[overgeeked]

Yeah, they feel more like solos. I used to just throw in more support troops which can work as well. I still either have support or environmental factors on the side of the legendary, there's just not much you can do when the entire group can focus fire.

Absolutely. The game's math assuming four PCs was such a bad call.

There's a bit of math going on and a couple of charts used for calculation. When I used to use use WOTC's math I'd ignore the number multiplier which seemed to help. When I plug things into the DndBeyond encounter builder, a lot of my fights come up deadly.

They're okay at tactics but not great, probably about average for experienced players or a bit under. They also aren't glowing like Christmas trees especially for their level and they used point buy. As mentioned above for previous groups I've adjusted based on the group's effectiveness.

So they're about average with tactics, power gaming, and magic items.

The difficulty level is just based on a percentage in the spreadsheet so you can adjust category bands as needed or, because I'm lazy, just add a level or 2 to the PCs.

Makes sense.

It's still not magic, but in general I find it useful. There's always going to be some fudging based on setting and how well monsters synergize. As always the dice can swing encounters in unexpected ways as well.

Of course. Vagaries of dice and player teamwork, monster teamwork, terrain, etc.

So from the sounds of things, with the house rules you're using, you've changed and fixed CR and encounter building enough to work as a ballpark for your table. That's great.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

CR as a singular number can't work. But there is no need to account for every variable possible, because that's impractical if not impossible, and most importantly not useful.

The XP budget worked extremely well in 4e, and is if anything improved by the "Nastier Specials" rules in 13th Age.

CR is not unworkable as a system. It just needs to actually get the serious analysis to permit such classifications.

 

[Lanefan]

again 4e had the answer... 1 reg, 4 minion 1/2 eliet or 1/5 a solo was per character...

For me, that avenue of monster design - where the same monster in the setting (as in, Grog the Ogre, the same ogre you've met four times during the campaign) would have its mechanics changed based solely on the competence of the party facing it - opened up far more unsolvable issues than it closed; mostly to do with in-setting consistency.

So, not a solution for me in any way.

 

[Stalker0]

I think the problem with CR is not the monster side, but the players. You can reasonably convert a monster statblock into a CR number, and WOTC has the info in the books to do just that. But then players are all over the place. All that is codified is "level", which is not nearly enough.

What the system should do is provide the same treatment for PCS as it does for monsters. Let a DM convert each PC into a CR number, based on the standard damage they do, AC, hp, all the same stuff, etc. There may be some modifiers for a party that is all ranged, or no casters, or XYZ.

This turns into a final party CR number. From there it should be a matter of comparison. If party CR = monster CR, challenge is standard. Monster CR +2, hard, etc etc.

And realistically this is not that much work, as the PCs are relatively static compared to monsters. The DM only has to do that once per level for the most part, and can use that party CR for all of his encounters going forward.

There will always be some tweaking based on specific conditions, but this should give you a much more solid foundation.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

then players are all over the place. All that is codified is "level", which is not nearly enough.

this is a big thing... there isn't a standard X power per level... even then you could say "Hey they have big stats +1 level" or "I handed out items so +1 level" but 5e doesn't do that well at all.

 

[Lanefan]

What the system should do is provide the same treatment for PCS as it does for monsters. Let a DM convert each PC into a CR number, based on the standard damage they do, AC, hp, all the same stuff, etc. There may be some modifiers for a party that is all ranged, or no casters, or XYZ.

Parties are so variable even day to day that such an endeavour would be at best a vague approximation.

Do you assume in the math they're at full pop in all their abilities (i.e. that they're nova-ready) or that they've used some resources? Do you assume they'll use whatever spells-resources they have in the most optimal manner? Can you quickly change the math on the fly to account for a party death, or on-the-fly acquisition of a new member or hench, or gain-loss of some high-powered magic items?

And realistically this is not that much work, as the PCs are relatively static compared to monsters. The DM only has to do that once per level for the most part, and can use that party CR for all of his encounters going forward.

There will always be some tweaking based on specific conditions, but this should give you a much more solid foundation.

I suspect that tweaking process would be persistent enough to make the returns not worth the effort.

 

[fjw70]

I use CR as a rough measure of a minster’s toughness Compared to other monsters. It does that job decently. But I never calculate encounter strength using the official rules. I basically just eye ball it and have a pretty good idea of what my PCs can handle. The players see me as a tough DM that will challenge them but PC death is pretty rare. In my main group I can only remember one death in the six years I have gamed with them And that was from one PC taking an unnecessary risk.

I have another group of noobs that I am still working with for them to not treat D&D like a video game. One time they were going into a castle to retrieve some items that were stolen from them. They were able to find and retrieve them but instead of leaving they decided to “clear the castle.” It did not end well.