D&D 5E Standard CR Assessment: Standard abilities a high level party is always expected to have?

[Sacrosanct]

But why can't you allow yourself to see the obvious warts. I can. I still love 5E. I just chose not to pretend its very real issues don't exist.

Every time you say this, I always laugh.

"Babe, I love you. I just think you're ugly. And I hate the way you talk. And you're an idiot. And I can't think of one thing in detail that I actually like about you. And you dress horribly. And you're incompetent. And you're lazy. Everything about you pisses me off."

You sure have a funny definition of "love".

 

[Hussar]

/snip

The point here is: a designer needs to take extremes into account in order to balance his game.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

No, they really, really don't.

And, you do realize that 3e was heavily criticized for it's entire run for it's CR calculations being too weak right? That people continuously bitched about how their groups were steam rolling encounters and CR was totally borked?

Funnily enough, the argument was identical to what you are presenting here. The party can deal so much damage, lock down the enemy so easily and encounters are just not challenging.

The more things change...

-------

BTW, yeah, I can see 150 damage being a decent baseline. Might be a tad high. As you say [MENTION=5889]Stalker0[/MENTION], you're not counting in misses into the mix. I'm basing it on what I've seen at my table, which has been a pretty consistent average at around 100 points of damage. Sometimes more, sometimes less, but, it has been very consistent.

 

[Zmajdusa]

Well they did give alot of band aids to the monster manual with the legendary traits and magic resistance. But yeah, the DM has to try and play to a monsters strengths to make it a challenge, though at around the 10 challenge level the monsters seem to be a little lackluster.

 

[Stalker0]

BTW, yeah, I can see 150 damage being a decent baseline. Might be a tad high. As you say [MENTION=5889]Stalker0[/MENTION], you're not counting in misses into the mix. I'm basing it on what I've seen at my table, which has been a pretty consistent average at around 100 points of damage. Sometimes more, sometimes less, but, it has been very consistent.

I figured if its a little on the high side, that just accounts for those riders that high level parties will find a way to get that we don't account for in theory.

 

[Hussar]

I figured if its a little on the high side, that just accounts for those riders that high level parties will find a way to get that we don't account for in theory.

Fair enough. And, really, it's not going to make a huge difference in play. Combats might take a round longer for my group than yours. Meh, it's a wash overall.

It's not 300 points/round after all.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

BTW, yeah, I can see 150 damage being a decent baseline. Might be a tad high. As you say [MENTION=5889]Stalker0[/MENTION], you're not counting in misses into the mix. I'm basing it on what I've seen at my table, which has been a pretty consistent average at around 100 points of damage. Sometimes more, sometimes less, but, it has been very consistent.

I figured if its a little on the high side, that just accounts for those riders that high level parties will find a way to get that we don't account for in theory.

I can see being able to do a similar thing for a Rogue, but can either of you think of a way to even attempt to calculate this for a spellcaster?

 

[Hussar]

Oh, for sure, it's a ball park number. Casters are going to swing the numbers a lot more in any single encounter. But, by the same token, the non-casters (or half casters like paladins or rangers) will have fairly regular damage expressions. It's not like the caster is bombing fireballs every single round after all.

Honestly, I think the best advice for any DM is simply observe your group. You should be able to get a feel for the damage (or, better yet, TRACK IT) after a session or three and plan from there.

 

[Sadras]

Why don't you simply agree that "demons are a joke", that dragons can't fulfil their expected role...etc

I agree with CapnZapp, demons/devils are a joke.
If I now use demons/devils, I give them 1 innate spell ability per round in addition to their normal attacks.

I don't have nearly enough experience with dragons to comment on them yet, so far I have made the ones they have encountered as incredibly cagey which makes the party fear them even more which is a good thing