Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sonofapreacherman" data-source="post: 337267" data-attributes="member: 2315">The problem isn't the monster, it's the CR systemI see no evidence of it, unless you and other designers intentionally set out to create a Challenge Ratings system that was counter-productive to the rest of what is otherwise a diversified edition of Dungeons and Dragons.You see, if you "knew" that players would optimize their characters, then why not create a Challenge Ratings system that scales with the party, rather than basing monster Challenge Ratings on the baseline statistics of one set of non-tweaked iconic characters? Rest assured, I understand full well what you meant by "baseline" Monte. Hopefully you see what I mean now.Something else bears mentioning. You and the other designers created a "wonderful" diversified role-playing system. It's just that the Challenge Rating system did not rise to that same level of diversification. So if you are taking these criticisms personally, please don't. The current Challenge Ratings system is (by your own admission) singular in its scope, only taking into account the iconic characters. It fundamentally lacks the ability to diversify across as many character types as possible.I'll be realistic now. You and the other designers accomplished A LOT with 3rd edition Dungeons and Dragons. Definite progress was made (the skill system for instance). So I'm not calling your efforts a failure by any stretch of the imagination. Challenge Ratings, however, need to be reworked. They require too much adjustment and tweaking at higher levels. They currently force dungeon masters to dissect monsters into their component parts (read: special abilities) in order to properly assign more appropriate Challenge Ratings and thus Experience Point rewards. It's too cumbersome a task that fails to offer "accuracy" as the final product.So let me ask you another question Monte...Rather than resisting what I suspect even you realize is a flawed Challenge Ratings system, why not instead weigh in amongst the devoted gamers of this thread and join the mammoth task of fixing it?I'm sure your help would be more than welcome.So far I would say that Ryan Dancey has the right idea with Challenge Ratings Factors, but it obviously needs to be built on.Heck, are you still reading along Ryan? I'd be interested in knowing if you have already done some preliminary work on those numbers? Can you offer this thread anything? I don't think anybody is expecting perfection at this stage. Just some *splattered* ideas to give people a starting point.</blockquote>

Verification