Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
My biggest gripe with 5e design
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="NotAYakk" data-source="post: 7854354" data-attributes="member: 72555"><p>I haven't seen you do any correlation math, so I assume you are using correlation in the "not the math word" way.</p><p></p><p>First, I said association. Second, [citation needed]. Of course there is a correlation there -- as one varies so does the other.</p><p></p><p>I described what the association is between 1e HD and 5e CR. They are both used as a measure of monster difficulty. 5e HD <strong>is not used as a measure of monster difficulty</strong>.</p><p></p><p>I believe HD correlates with damage, because I know HD correlates with HP (as it is <strong>derived from HP</strong>, and monster size, and monster con bonus), and HP correlates with CR, and CR correlates with Damage. But starting with HD is frankly ridiculous given how the DMG describes how to build monsters.</p><p></p><p>Possibly the monsters in the MM where not built using the method described in the DMG. But it sure looks like they where. Kobolds have 2 HD not because someone thought "Kobolds should have 2 HD", but because they are <strong>small</strong> (so their HD are d6s), and because they wanted them to have [g]negative con[/b] and about <strong>5 HP</strong>. So 5/(3.5-1) = 2, so they have 2 HD.</p><p></p><p>They are CR 1/8, so they have a proficiency bonus of +2. They use Dex to attack, and they should be Dexterous -- but not too far, they are low-CR monsters. So 15 Dex (+2). From <strong>that</strong> you get an attack bonus of +4.</p><p></p><p>Given that attack bonus and a target low-CR, they get 1d4 damage weapons. So they hit for 1d4+2 at +4 to hit. This gives you an offensive CR.</p><p></p><p>AC wise, with 15 dex they have 12 AC. There isn't an obvious reason to penalize this; you could give them a bonus, but we'll pass.</p><p></p><p>From 12 AC and 5 HP you get a defensive CR, from +4 ATK and 1d4+2 damage you get an offensive CR, you average them and you get a CR of 1/8. This matches the designers concept of a weak humanoid foe!</p><p></p><p>Do the same with an orc, and because they are medium (d8 HD) and the concept has them with high constitution (+2) for a low-CR monster, and HP in the 10 to 20 range, we get (10 to 20) / (4.5+2) is 2ish or 3ish HD. Etc.</p><p></p><p>Make a creature that is identical to an orc, but small and has -1 con, and it has 6 HD. Its attack bonus and HP and CR remain unchanged (moving con from +2 to -1 isn't a large enough change to trigger a CR change likely).</p><p></p><p>The reason why HD correlates is that the other stuff -- size, con, etc -- is semi-random, if slightly increasing with monster CR, and CR is how tough a monster is, and how tough a monster is in 5e correlates with how tough it is in 1e.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="NotAYakk, post: 7854354, member: 72555"] I haven't seen you do any correlation math, so I assume you are using correlation in the "not the math word" way. First, I said association. Second, [citation needed]. Of course there is a correlation there -- as one varies so does the other. I described what the association is between 1e HD and 5e CR. They are both used as a measure of monster difficulty. 5e HD [b]is not used as a measure of monster difficulty[/b]. I believe HD correlates with damage, because I know HD correlates with HP (as it is [b]derived from HP[/b], and monster size, and monster con bonus), and HP correlates with CR, and CR correlates with Damage. But starting with HD is frankly ridiculous given how the DMG describes how to build monsters. Possibly the monsters in the MM where not built using the method described in the DMG. But it sure looks like they where. Kobolds have 2 HD not because someone thought "Kobolds should have 2 HD", but because they are [b]small[/b] (so their HD are d6s), and because they wanted them to have [g]negative con[/b] and about [b]5 HP[/b]. So 5/(3.5-1) = 2, so they have 2 HD. They are CR 1/8, so they have a proficiency bonus of +2. They use Dex to attack, and they should be Dexterous -- but not too far, they are low-CR monsters. So 15 Dex (+2). From [b]that[/b] you get an attack bonus of +4. Given that attack bonus and a target low-CR, they get 1d4 damage weapons. So they hit for 1d4+2 at +4 to hit. This gives you an offensive CR. AC wise, with 15 dex they have 12 AC. There isn't an obvious reason to penalize this; you could give them a bonus, but we'll pass. From 12 AC and 5 HP you get a defensive CR, from +4 ATK and 1d4+2 damage you get an offensive CR, you average them and you get a CR of 1/8. This matches the designers concept of a weak humanoid foe! Do the same with an orc, and because they are medium (d8 HD) and the concept has them with high constitution (+2) for a low-CR monster, and HP in the 10 to 20 range, we get (10 to 20) / (4.5+2) is 2ish or 3ish HD. Etc. Make a creature that is identical to an orc, but small and has -1 con, and it has 6 HD. Its attack bonus and HP and CR remain unchanged (moving con from +2 to -1 isn't a large enough change to trigger a CR change likely). The reason why HD correlates is that the other stuff -- size, con, etc -- is semi-random, if slightly increasing with monster CR, and CR is how tough a monster is, and how tough a monster is in 5e correlates with how tough it is in 1e. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
My biggest gripe with 5e design
Top