Optimum CR spread in Monster Books.

[Desdichado]

I think your better off adding a fourth category rather than stretching the low category to cover CRs fractional-9, which seems to be into ... er, not low.

I'd go like this:
Low: fractional - 5 or so
Medium: 6-10
High: 11-15
Pre-Epic: 16-20
Epic: 21+

Or something like that.

 

[LGodamus]

we have seen something like this..the mm2 was released a good bit after 3e and was advertised as having more "high" level challenges since campaigns would have had time to reach the levels sufficient to use em.

 

[Shade]

I'd be more likely to buy a high-CR monster book than a low CR book, for several reasons.

First, it is easier to create a low-level monster from scratch. The high ones are more fun to make, but often take forever due to numerous special abilities and skill assignments.

Second, many low-level monster sare yet another humanoid or monstrous humanoid, which quite frankly, I have more than enough to fill a campaign world.

Third, since all the books currently on the market skew low, we are left with far fewer high CR monsters.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hello again mate!

Most but not all

GF Monsters is supplement sized but generic as is E-Minions.

I am sure there are a number of smaller generic monster supplements; but much fewre specific monster books.

MMII and FF are book sized but MMII was supposed to be themed as higher CR than MMI

No doubt to counterpoise things like animals and vermin which make up a large number of MM entries.

and FF was supposed to be outsider heavy.

Have a look at the monsters by type at the start of the Fiend Folio.

Denizens of Darkness is book sized but themed for horror.

I have only limited experience of that book, but I don't see horror as a theme much divorced from fantasy monsters.

Higher CR base creatures are tougher to generate for monster ideas than mid level ones.

I always found it easy to generate high CR monster ideas.

In your system, for example, a top end unadvanced elemental (elder) at 24 HD and CR 11 comes out to a barely mid-level monster.

Well you have to wonder why they didn't extend the elementals to Gargantuan and Colossal proportions; but instead curtailed the HD and growth of Greater and Elder Elementals to Huge size.

So I think generic ones are going to have fewer high CR monsters simply because most base monster ideas will not land there.

I don't necessarily agree with that if we are talking in terms of an appropriate CR spread.

Of course most creatures can have their CR boosted by Adding HD, levels or templates, letting them enter your High CR range, but that takes a lot more effort than pulling a critter out of the book on the spur of the moment.

Absolutely.

Sorry, Monsternomicon is one I don't have.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hello again mate!

what's the percentage breakdown for the MMI?

I didn't want to have to sort through the Animals and Vermin of that book which no doubt colour the spread heavily in favour of Low-level Monsters. Sorry.

 

[knight_isa]

Hey Voadam mate!
Does anyone out there have the Monsternomicon? I have been interested in getting that book (judging by the good reviews). I am curious how the CRs are brokedown.

I have it, but it's at home and I'm not. I'll post a breakdown tonight if it hasn't already been done.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey Leopold mate!

now are we talking U_K's CR system or the 'normal' CR system here

For the purposes of this discussion we can sideline that for now.

on another note I want a book of 14+ Badazz monsters, the bigger the better the more i want it.

I just want a fair spread in generic monster books.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Dimwhit!

I like to see more monsters in the CR8-14 range. I think those are among the toughest levels to challenge PCs, or at least when PCs are the most powerful (by my experience, anyway).

I believe you have hit upon the area I think most monster books should concentrate on delivering interesting monsters.

I like the idea of Monster books released for different CR levels.

Agreed. I think that would save me sitting through 90% of books to get the choice 10% I'm after.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi maddman75!

I personally like the current spread.

Which spread is that though? The Creature Collection spread or the Monster Manual 2 spread?

When PCs get to high levels, I'll buff things up by adding either templates, numbers or class levels. Its much easier to make a group of orcs all barbarians to challenge a 15th level party. Its much more difficult to weaken a demon to challenge a 3rd level party.

But we are not asking even for parity with Low-level monsters; simply that there is a good spread.

I mean I may want a book to have as many High-level monsters as possible, but I am impartial enough to know that to please the greatest majority of people will want Low-level monsters; then Mid-level monsters then High-level monsters in that order.

I just don't advocate monster books or supplements that don't support in some small part high-level gaming or placate a good percentage of mid-level gaming (without prior advertising of their intentions).

To me Monster Manual 2 and Fiend Folio support all types of gaming; whereas the Creature Collections (much as I respect S&SS) do not. Nothing wrong with S&SS position, but I would prefer it if they stated Low-Mid Level Monsters in some of the books press.

 

[Upper_Krust]

hiya mate!

I would split monster CRs differently:

Low: 2 and under -- some groups play low-level games exclusively, where CR 2 monsters (sometimes with levels) are all that's needed, while others skip the starting levels.
Middle-low: 3 - 8 -- the 'sweet spot' for many games; the focus of Living Campaigns IMO.
Middle-high: 9 - 15 -- more common thanks to 3E, though traditionally less popular; useful as a basis for high-level worlds (FR) and big baddies for lower-powered games
High: 16 - 25 -- anything that high-end, non-epic characters could face
Epic: 26+ -- requires an additional ruleset to play

If you're not careful you can get bogged down in over analysis...I should know.