D&D 5E New Spellcasting Blocks for Monsters --- Why?!

[Maxperson]

Let's try it this way. Is a Monster Manual a rulebook? It certainly has rules in it. But is it more of a DM reference than an actual rulebook?

It's not a rulebook according to 5e.

DMG page 263

"AS THE DUNGEON MASTER, YOU AREN'T LIMITED by the rules in the Player 's Handbook, the guidelines in this book, or the selection of monsters in the Monster Manual."

The PHB contains rules, the DMG is guidelines, and the MM is just a selection of monsters. Those monsters use the rules from the PHB and guidelines from the DMG, but are not rules themselves.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Tucker's kobolds are a mechanical exploit:

And no one has ever designed a CR system that allows for enemies that exploit a specific party weakness or allows for players who exploit a specific strategy or monster weakness.

For example, consider a party that makes considerable use of Hypnotic Pattern to neutralise threats. That will mean that monsters with immunity to charm are a far higher challenge than those without. But then the next party comes along, and they don't have Hypnotic Pattern.

Not only is CR next to useless, there is no way to design a CR system that is not next to useless.

The vast majority of D&D adventures considered "classic" were designed before the existence of a CR system, and very few after. One might even consider the CR crutch an impediment to good encounter design.

 

[Hussar]

And no one has ever designed a CR system that allows for enemies that exploit a specific party weakness or allows for players who exploit a specific strategy or monster weakness.

For example, consider a party that makes considerable use of Hypnotic Pattern to neutralise threats. That will mean that monsters with immunity to charm are a far higher challenge than those without. But then the next party comes along, and they don't have Hypnotic Pattern.

Not only is CR next to useless, there is no way to design a CR system that is not next to useless.

The vast majority of D&D adventures considered "classic" were designed before the existence of a CR system, and very few after. One might even consider the CR crutch an impediment to good encounter design.

well no, that's not quite right.

Again, it's a tool. It's a predictive tool. So, with any predictive model, you have to make assumptions. So, you can't assume that you have a group of several casters that can largely endlessly spam Hypnotic Pattern. That's the DM's job. You're expecting CR to do everything, and it just doesn't. And it never has.

And, let's not forget, you're taking a really extreme example. A group that solely uses charms is a really weird group and likely only exists in theory crafting white rooms. Far more likely, the group has a range of abilities because the group is smart enough to know that not all creatures can be charmed.

The CR system is based on assumptions. The further you go from those assumptions, the less accurate CR will be. Of course. That's the nature of any predictive system. This isn't a secret though or something that couldn't possibly be known or deduced. It's pretty obvious. I guess they probably should state it up front, but, again, there's gotta be at least a minimal attempt by the user to understand the system when using it.

/edit to add after checking

Oh wait, they actually DO tell you about this. There's a nifty little sidebar on page 82 that talks about how some monsters might not line up exactly with their CR number and the DM needs to be aware of this.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Again, it's a tool. It's a predictive tool.

Sure. It's just not a very good one (and can never be).

And, let's not forget, you're taking a really extreme example. A group that solely uses charms is a really weird group and likely only exists in theory crafting white rooms

This particular example is one I know from actual play. But the thing is, there are a multitude of such examples. To take a current one, I ended my last session with my players' level 20 party about to be attacked by 26 intellect devourers. According to CR, this is a medium challenge. But actually, they will almost certainly all die by fireball before they can act, and the only damage the party takes will be to those characters caught in the blast radius. Which they can shrug off.

The "average party" that CR assumes is the unicorn that does not exist outside of a white room.

 

[Minigiant]

But, isn't that CR working as advertised? The rules say that if you drop stronger monsters into the mix, you are making the encounter more deadly. 5e's math is far too loose to have a CR system that's anything more than an educated guess. It's just no possible to have a system that is a better predictor of combat output in a system that loose. 4e? Yeah, you had a CR system that was spot on because the math was so tight. 3e? Back to voodoo and chicken entrails because the math varied so wildly from table to table.

You can't have both. You can have tight math and a good predictive system, or loose math and a poor predictive system.

But that's not what Iwas arguing. The CR system works for what it was designed for: running monsters in small groups and like idiots vs magic-item-less PCs.

The issue is that's not how many groups play.

That's the whole point of the thread.
Someone asked why spellcasting monsters were changed.
The asnwer is that if the DM ran the old spellcasters with intelligence, the spellcasters would be exhausting to run and quick to cause TPKs. So they were made easier to run and less swingy.

 

[Hussar]

Sure. It's just not a very good one (and can never be).

This particular example is one I know from actual play. But the thing is, there are a multitude of such examples. To take a current one, I ended my last session with my players' level 20 party about to be attacked by 26 intellect devourers. According to CR, this is a medium challenge. But actually, they will almost certainly all die by fireball before they can act, and the only damage the party takes will be to those characters caught in the blast radius. Which they can shrug off.

The "average party" that CR assumes is the unicorn that does not exist outside of a white room.

Well, again, you are going WAYYY outside of typical here. 26 intellect devourers in a small space is no different than 26 commoners for a 20th level party, regardless of the xp budget. I mean, come on here. Give the Intellect devourers surprise or make the room magically dark and watch what happens.

You're dropping CR 2 creatures on a 20th level party and expecting the CR system to work? I think that perhaps you're expecting just a little too much

 

[Hussar]

But that's not what Iwas arguing. The CR system works for what it was designed for: running monsters in small groups and like idiots vs magic-item-less PCs.

The issue is that's not how many groups play.

That's the whole point of the thread.
Someone asked why spellcasting monsters were changed.
The asnwer is that if the DM ran the old spellcasters with intelligence, the spellcasters would be exhausting to run and quick to cause TPKs. So they were made easier to run and less swingy.

But, none of this is a CR issue. I'm frankly kinda confused where we got onto this CR train, but it was interesting, so, no worries. But, as far as the reduced powers for casters, that has pretty much nothing to do with the CR system at all.

 

[Helldritch]

Strangely, I've never once worried about the XP budget when running either of my games--and I've been running them both for years--and I've never had the game "crash" or "get hijacked" even once. And it's not because I'm some magically perfect DM, who runs a magically perfect game, either.

And I will quote my self again.

You know that a car needs blue water. You are not obliged to put blue water in it. But do not blame the car when its windshield is so dirty that you have a car accident.
You know that you do not need anti-virus or VPN to run your computer. You are not forced to. But do not blame your computer when you get it highjack because you did not use anti-viruses or VPN.

The same goes with the EXP Budget. You are not forced to use it. But do not blame the game if you do not follow the guidelines about it.

You might do fine without adding blue water, as long as there is some the problem will not arise. Being lucky does not mean you might not need some.
Same with anti-viruses and VPN, you might never need one. Being lucky does not mean the problems will never arise.

No one says you're a magical DM (neither am I). A tool is there to help you. CR system is a bit wonky with some creatures (especially solo ones) having experience in other systems and/or depending on the focus of your games (I know one DM that almost never run combats while some others are more on the tactical combat with no RP and others within the both extremes) the CR system might not even be needed. But at least it's there to help and guide you. But if someone feels the game is too wonky and swingy, maybe a look at how things are actually proposed to be might help.

 

[Helldritch]

Unfortunately, this may be one of those things that newbies just have to learn as they go along. Monsters can be really swingy depending on a lot of different elements, including party composition and how how intelligently the DM plays them. Anyone remember Tucker's kobolds?

And honestly, there was no CR or encounter design back in the early AD&D days, and I'd say that those DMs managed to figure it out OK.

Yep, but many HAD to figure it out. HD and general EXP values were the way to evaluate how a monster would fare. Generally.
I know of many young DM that had slain entire groups with but a single Will O' the Wisp... at level 1. And I have heard about games in which the gods were afraid of the characters at level 10... The game was great at that time, but the Monty Haul campaing started to exist right there simply because it had no real tools to help people out. Dragon Magazine was full of good (and sometimes silly) advice but if you were not able to read English, you were done for. You had to learn the game on your own or be lucky as I was, having a good mentor to show you how the game is supposed to work. I was lucky enough to be able to read English an have a good mentor. Not everyone can claim that much.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

You're dropping CR 2 creatures on a 20th level party and expecting the CR system to work?

No, I'm not expecting it to work. I know darn well it doesn't. But if you accept that the CR system doesn't work at level 20, what level do you think it does work for? Level 19? Level 15? Level 11? Level 7? Level 3? It certainly doesn't say "does not work over level X" in the rules.

26 intellect devourers in a small space is no different than 26 commoners

Not a brilliant comparison, since the commoners pose no threat if they are not dealt with, so there is no reason to fireball them. Intellect Devourers could potentially be a threat if not dealt with. But there is certainly no difference between 26 Intellect Devourers and a billion Intellect Devourers in a small room.

Give the Intellect devourers surprise or make the room magically dark

I'm not particularly trying to make a difficult encounter, and our level 20 party wouldn't find magical darkness difficult and are virtually impossible to surprise. But spreading them out over a large area would certainly make the encounter more difficult. The tactical situation makes a huge difference, but the CR system does not make any allowance for that whatsoever.