D&D 5E Let’s Read Mordenkainen Presents: Monsters of the Multiverse.

[Parmandur]

Or the under-optimizer who just grabs classic spells. I have a friend who frequently uses sleep even against obviously higher-level foes because she really doesn't bother to look at what each spell does or compare them to other spells, and I always feel so bad when I have to tell her her spell has no effect.

I don't know why, in the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand and Twenty-Two, people still insist on looking at Monsters assuming an optimized group of players, when WotC has said they assume play like your friends when they design.

 

[dave2008]

I would think the fact that there are always circumstances is a mark against the CR system, as it presumes there aren't.

Circumstances apply to encounters not CR. They should be discussed in the encounter building guidelines and not part of CR. CR is a monster's "level," but monster or PC level doesn't tell you about circumstances, and shouldn't IMO, and I don't believe that is how it is intended to be used.

 

[Thommy H-H]

On Dragons being over powered for their CR. The Gem Dragons properly match up, so I can see the other Dragons being fixed come the new core.

I figured out that the MM dragon CRs work out if their breath weapons only hit one target (as opposed to two, which is the default assumption for the DPR calculation for area effects). I think it's likely that they statted up the dragons really early on because, you know, it's in the game's name, and also Kobold Press needed them to get the Tyranny of Dragons adventures out ahead of the core books, and therefore hadn't nailed down the maths yet. The dragons in Fizban's do indeed have the right CR for their damage though, and this leads to weird situations like Greatwyrms having less dangerous breath weapons than their Ancient equivalents!

I made some 'rebalanced' statblocks for the MM dragons, and the rule of thumb is that their breath weapon's average damage (per target) is the same as the DPR from their other attacks (not counting Legendary Actions), plus a little bit of hit point tweaking for the older categories IIRC.

But yeah, the conclusion to draw from all this (if any) is that CR is an estimate. It already assumes the monster is going to be used optimally, cheerfully burns through all its resources in one fight, and conveniently dies after three rounds. You have to understand the system's limits and what they're for before you start hacking it. In the case of the quickling, it is CR 3 by the numbers, but they probably knocked it down because there are a lot of situations in which a competently-played party can kill it almost instantly. It's the reverse of the ogre, which is technically CR 1, but its DPR is too much for a level 1 party to handle so it's bumped up to CR 2.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don't know why, in the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand and Twenty-Two, people still insist on looking at Monsters assuming an optimized group of players, when WotC has said they assume play like your friends when they design.

My friends are an optimized group of players. Who's to say other people's friends aren't as well?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Circumstances apply to encounters not CR. They should be discussed in the encounter building guidelines and not part of CR. CR is a monster's "level," but monster or PC level doesn't tell you about circumstances, and shouldn't IMO, and I don't believe that is how it is intended to be used.

I just think CR should either be removed, or heavily downplayed in the text (kinda like alignment is now). It's taken far too seriously by the game.

 

[dave2008]

I just think CR should either be removed, or heavily downplayed in the text (kinda like alignment is now). It's taken far too seriously by the game.

IDK, the encounter guidelines are based on XP, both per encounter and per day. That, to my eye, is the emphasis in the books. Maybe since I come from the pre-CR days I just don't see CR as big deal by default.

 

[Parmandur]

My friends are an optimized group of players. Who's to say other people's friends aren't as well?

Then congratulations, they are good at D&D. The game is tuned to non-optimuzers so they aren't punished, which rewards optimizers. The arms race is over.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Then congratulations, they are good at D&D. The game is tuned to non-optimuzers so they aren't punished, which rewards optimizers. The arms race is over.

A little snippy there. I'm just saying they really should be clear in the books what their expectations are. If the game as written is intended for a low to moderate level of optimization, they should make that clear in the game, not in comments on social media and interviews.

 

[Micah Sweet]

IDK, the encounter guidelines are based on XP, both per encounter and per day. That, to my eye, is the emphasis in the books. Maybe since I come from the pre-CR days I just don't see CR as bog deal by default.

Fair enough. I don't really use it at all. But enough people seem irritated by it that if it isn't a big deal it may be giving off the wrong impression.

 

[Parmandur]

A little snippy there. I'm just saying they really should be clear in the books what their expectations are. If the game as written is intended for a low to moderate level of optimization, they should make that clear in the game, not in comments on social media and interviews.

I mean, the CR system honestly makes that pretty clear. They reward skilled play by not trying to punish or fight people optimizing: if you optimize, you do better. But the assumption is that people are not optimized: based on the D&D Beyond info we have, most people playing really aren't optimizing in the slightest, so it makes sense to use what people are actually doing as the baseline.