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
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Players, DMs and Save or Die
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="Geron Raveneye" data-source="post: 3873996" data-attributes="member: 2268"><p>Sure. Apparently, if the creature doesn't get to kill a PC because the melee specialists dispatch with it in 2 rounds because they are pimped out with ability buffs, damage buffs and AC buffs, that's different from a creature that doesn't get to kill a PC because the knowledge specialists have determined its weakness beforehand, prepared the melee specialists accordingly, and they get to dispatch with the creature in 2 rounds. The latter, according to you, is a glass cannon. What's the former called again?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You know, that's two completely different failures we're talking here. Me, I'm simply claiming that CR as the sole arbiter of a creature's difficulty in an encounter is insufficient. That has nothing to do with the designers noting that "Hey, this CR for one creature is fine, but it might get very wonky if you scale the CR of them up through sheer numbers." Apples and oranges, you know.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Agreed...this simply means that there should be a better system in place to adjudicate monsters. CR is simply not enough. It probably works well with straight melee monsters, but as soon as the monster in question has more than one special ability that doesn't directly map to combat damage (hit points), CR goes down the drain more often than not.</p><p></p><p>But hey, we could of course simply start cutting away all abilities that do not map directly to combat.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yeah...and a 13th level group that confronts a Glabrezu with nothing but cold iron weapons and a <em>Dimensional Lock</em> either has a very stingy DM, doesn't have a clue about what a Glabrezu really can do, or is desperately looking for a TPK. If you have a "standard" 13th level group with standard equipment with proper preparations, they will turn your Glabrezu example into a 2-round battle. I can only refer to the <em>Tales of Wyre</em> story hour to illustrate what a really high-level group that prepares for an encounter does to the monster in question.</p><p>At some level, preparation turns every monster into a cakewalk. Which is why people prepare for encounters, if they can. To minimize, or negate, losses while maximizing their kill probability.</p><p>The bigger problem is that CR is simply not the be-all end-all of monster classification. It's good at giving pointers, but designing everything around it, or demanding everything should fit it is a bit short-sighted, and shows in many cases. RC already said it...CR discussions are nearly as old as 3E itself.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Geron Raveneye, post: 3873996, member: 2268"] Sure. Apparently, if the creature doesn't get to kill a PC because the melee specialists dispatch with it in 2 rounds because they are pimped out with ability buffs, damage buffs and AC buffs, that's different from a creature that doesn't get to kill a PC because the knowledge specialists have determined its weakness beforehand, prepared the melee specialists accordingly, and they get to dispatch with the creature in 2 rounds. The latter, according to you, is a glass cannon. What's the former called again? You know, that's two completely different failures we're talking here. Me, I'm simply claiming that CR as the sole arbiter of a creature's difficulty in an encounter is insufficient. That has nothing to do with the designers noting that "Hey, this CR for one creature is fine, but it might get very wonky if you scale the CR of them up through sheer numbers." Apples and oranges, you know. Agreed...this simply means that there should be a better system in place to adjudicate monsters. CR is simply not enough. It probably works well with straight melee monsters, but as soon as the monster in question has more than one special ability that doesn't directly map to combat damage (hit points), CR goes down the drain more often than not. But hey, we could of course simply start cutting away all abilities that do not map directly to combat. Yeah...and a 13th level group that confronts a Glabrezu with nothing but cold iron weapons and a [i]Dimensional Lock[/i] either has a very stingy DM, doesn't have a clue about what a Glabrezu really can do, or is desperately looking for a TPK. If you have a "standard" 13th level group with standard equipment with proper preparations, they will turn your Glabrezu example into a 2-round battle. I can only refer to the [i]Tales of Wyre[/i] story hour to illustrate what a really high-level group that prepares for an encounter does to the monster in question. At some level, preparation turns every monster into a cakewalk. Which is why people prepare for encounters, if they can. To minimize, or negate, losses while maximizing their kill probability. The bigger problem is that CR is simply not the be-all end-all of monster classification. It's good at giving pointers, but designing everything around it, or demanding everything should fit it is a bit short-sighted, and shows in many cases. RC already said it...CR discussions are nearly as old as 3E itself. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Players, DMs and Save or Die
Top