D&D 5E Running D&D 5e for Levels 10+

[The Crimson Binome]

It sounds to me like you are very hesitant to deviate from the established math and the monster entries as they exist, is that right?

Specifically for the 1-20 game that I ran, I was running it as close to by-the-book as possible, so I could gain first-hand experience with how the system worked baseline. My goal was to figure out which parts of the game didn't work, so I would know what kind of house rules or DMing guidelines I would need to bring into the next campaign.

Things were mostly working out at low levels, but by level nine, I was seriously starting to suspect that the monsters weren't keeping up with the party, so I included a completely optional side-quest to defeat a balor in ritual combat. When the party managed to win that, I knew that I was going to have to change something in order to keep the game interesting for another eleven levels. Skewing the encounter table to include tougher combinations of monsters seemed like it would give more useful data than going through and altering each individual monster to be arbitrarily more powerful.

My conclusion, for the next game I run, is to use more homebrew monsters; but more importantly, to drastically cut back the natural healing rate, so you don't have to fight ten Empyreans all in one day before anyone starts running low. (Also, reduce the damage of weapons by an additional fifty percent when used underwater, unless the weapon is piercing and the creature has a swim speed.)

 

[Sadras]

These spam ads are getting better.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Just as a thought. Give a Frost giant 4 levels of Bear Totem Barbarian and the Tough feat. That gives him a base of 208 HP, effectively doubled to 416 HP, and, heck, make him a Frenzy Barbarian for a 3rd attack on the second round onward. Becomes about a CR 10 creature (or thereabouts). Would take about 10 seconds to stat that up.

Do we really need to rewrite the books for this?

I thought the DM's Guide was designed to handle just such a situation?

 

[Raunalyn]

Just as a thought. Give a Frost giant 4 levels of Bear Totem Barbarian and the Tough feat. That gives him a base of 208 HP, effectively doubled to 416 HP, and, heck, make him a Frenzy Barbarian for a 3rd attack on the second round onward. Becomes about a CR 10 creature (or thereabouts). Would take about 10 seconds to stat that up.

Do we really need to rewrite the books for this?

Do you really want to give your DM who is running SKT ideas like this, good sir?

 

[Sacrosanct]

I thought the DM's Guide was designed to handle just such a situation?

It does, almost exactly like Hussar says like I posted earlier. So no, we don't need a rewrite. Not only that, but also as the book says, you might not even need to change the CR by adding a few class levels if the monster is a high CR creature anyway.

Do you really want to give your DM who is running SKT ideas like this, good sir?

Well, if the DM has read the DMG, then he or she already knows

 

[Raunalyn]

Well, if the DM has read the DMG, then he or she already knows

Oh, I do...it's just the DM teasing him because he's currently playing in my SKT campaign.

I do love spooking out my players

 

[MichaelSomething]

It does, almost exactly like Hussar says like I posted earlier. So no, we don't need a rewrite. Not only that, but also as the book says, you might not even need to change the CR by adding a few class levels if the monster is a high CR creature anyway.



Well, if the DM has read the DMG, then he or she already knows

Must have missed that. It's easy to in a thread this big, my bad. WOTC focuses on the casual crowd anyway, so more advanced players need to look else were for certain things. Though some guidence would always be useful.

Sent from my VS990 using EN World mobile app

 

[hawkeyefan]

Specifically for the 1-20 game that I ran, I was running it as close to by-the-book as possible, so I could gain first-hand experience with how the system worked baseline. My goal was to figure out which parts of the game didn't work, so I would know what kind of house rules or DMing guidelines I would need to bring into the next campaign.

Things were mostly working out at low levels, but by level nine, I was seriously starting to suspect that the monsters weren't keeping up with the party, so I included a completely optional side-quest to defeat a balor in ritual combat. When the party managed to win that, I knew that I was going to have to change something in order to keep the game interesting for another eleven levels. Skewing the encounter table to include tougher combinations of monsters seemed like it would give more useful data than going through and altering each individual monster to be arbitrarily more powerful.

My conclusion, for the next game I run, is to use more homebrew monsters; but more importantly, to drastically cut back the natural healing rate, so you don't have to fight ten Empyreans all in one day before anyone starts running low. (Also, reduce the damage of weapons by an additional fifty percent when used underwater, unless the weapon is piercing and the creature has a swim speed.)

Okay, so you’re doing a but more on the PC side to reduce their power rather than to increase the monster power. That’s perfectly viable. And reducing healing rates, I think, is one of the best ways to do so because it doesn’t really take away any of the fun stuff the PCs get.

Homebrew monsters are a good idea. I use them a good amount myself. But I have to ask...if you’re willing to homebrew, why the reluctance to alter existing monsters? Is it just to try and leave the CR/XP system as intact as possible?

 

[Raunalyn]

Okay, so you’re doing a but more on the PC side to reduce their power rather than to increase the monster power. That’s perfectly viable. And reducing healing rates, I think, is one of the best ways to do so because it doesn’t really take away any of the fun stuff the PCs get.

Homebrew monsters are a good idea. I use them a good amount myself. But I have to ask...if you’re willing to homebrew, why the reluctance to alter existing monsters? Is it just to try and leave the CR/XP system as intact as possible?

This is actually an interesting question. I have noticed that the monsters in the MM do not necessarily reflect the CR guidelines in the DMG. What I usually end up doing for higher level monsters is look at the average HPs and defenses for a monster of that CR in the DMG and adjusting as needed. Tends to work well.

 

[hawkeyefan]

This is actually an interesting question. I have noticed that the monsters in the MM do not necessarily reflect the CR guidelines in the DMG. What I usually end up doing for higher level monsters is look at the average HPs and defenses for a monster of that CR in the DMG and adjusting as needed. Tends to work well.

That's interesting. I admit to being pretty unfamiliar with the CR ratings beyond using them as a very loose approximation of a monster's power. I don't bother with XP in favor of a more Milestone Approach, so in these discussions I sometimes forget how rigidly many people adhere to those guidelines. I don't use them at all.