Optimum CR spread in Monster Books.

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Nightfall mate!

Incidently enough mate, part of this post arose after I had studied the past Creature Collections and was wondering was there much point submitting any high-level monsters for CC4...?

Admit Krusty mate. You're just slightly irate they toned down your Crown Naga.

Not at all, I was happy they thought the idea had merit...it just so happened what they did with it was substantially inferior to the original (similarly so theit incarnation of the Moon Daemon)...if I do say so myself.

I think with regards the original Crown Naga they were possibly intimidated because it would have heavily impacted Scarn politics.

Or at least didn't put in more of your higher level CR monsters. *is kidding*

I think Creature Collection 2 had a plethora of fantastic monster ideas, which was why I was doubly surprised when my DM friend commented he couldn't find any appropriate challenges for his Mid-level party. I went back over the book and was shocked to find that only 11 out of 169 monsters were CR 10+. Thats just an astonishingly weighted percentage - in mean thats flat out a Low-level centric book.

Again nothing wrong with that, but is it too much for me (and others) to expect a good spread of monsters? I don't think so.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey Joshus mate!

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.

I am sure there are many ways of doing it, though as a base minimum theres no way you can legitamately go lower than:

Low: 1-6
Mid: 7-12
High: 13+

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi 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.

But was that anything other than a wholly logical progression!? Of course not. Added to which it never ignored Low or Mid-level gaming at all. Whereas the counterpoise is that the Creature Collections do seemingly ignore High-level and to an extent Mid-Level gaming.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi 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.

All valid points.

I think if certain publishers are still happy to ignore High-level gaming (their prerogative I agree) then products should be clearly advertised as such...with something akin to "Supports Low to Mid-Level Monsters" or similar; and I don't mean get away with throwing in one CR 27 monster so they can say from CR 1/10th to CR 27 and therein only have one monster over CR 15. i'm talking about running the gamut of CRs.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi knight_isa!

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.

That would be greatly appreciated.

The other Monster Book I would consider getting is the Liber Bestiarus which had great art as I recall. I should have picked that up at Euro Gencon; these things are a nightmare to get here when you don't have a credit card.

 

[Nightfall]

Hi Nightfall mate!

Incidently enough mate, part of this post arose after I had studied the past Creature Collections and was wondering was there much point submitting any high-level monsters for CC4...?

Some how I'm not surprised by this.

Not at all, I was happy they thought the idea had merit...it just so happened what they did with it was substantially inferior to the original (similarly so theit incarnation of the Moon Daemon)...if I do say so myself.

True but toss out five or six of those puppies, you got some SERIOUS trouble for mid level and even on occasion, high level parties.

I think with regards the original Crown Naga they were possibly intimidated because it would have heavily impacted Scarn politics.

I can see that Krusty mate

I think Creature Collection 2 had a plethora of fantastic monster ideas, which was why I was doubly surprised when my DM friend commented he couldn't find any appropriate challenges for his Mid-level party. I went back over the book and was shocked to find that only 11 out of 169 monsters were CR 10+. Thats just an astonishingly weighted percentage - in mean thats flat out a Low-level centric book.

Again nothing wrong with that, but is it too much for me (and others) to expect a good spread of monsters? I don't think so.

Mm good point. I will say SINGLEY he's correct. But toss out say like four, fight or six of the daemons, demons and even a Dark Womb combined with a Deepspawn, fun previals.

 

[knight_isa]

Double post (that's what I get for posting with a 2-year-old sitting on my lap).

 

[knight_isa]

Monsternomicon (by my count, which involved quickly flipping through the book as there is no index by CR)

Fractional: (8) 8%
CR 1-9: (69) 75% (although there are several CR 9)
CR 10-18: (11) 12%
CR 19+: (5) 5% (includes 3 dragons with CR 49, 60, and 66)

 

[CRGreathouse]

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

Do you really think I have? You listed four categories (fractional, low, medium, high), and I listed one more (low, mid-low, mid-high, high, epic). The only essential differences between our lists: I split high into 'high' and 'epic', and I combined your fractional and lower-end low.

I think that CR 1/3 and CR 2 should be in the same category, as the same kinds of groups use both in similar amounts, in my experience.

 

[Wicht]

I could be wrong, but I thought that the general low CR trend was deliberate. The reasoning was that each monster listed in the MM1 was the weakest example of its kind. Yet almost every monster had the ability to be ratcheted up (as a few have mentioned already). Granted this is not as easy as just using the monster verbatim from the rule book, but when it comes to higher level play I find that the higher the PC level, the more work the adventure design is anyway.