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
*Dungeons & Dragons
Starter Set: Except 7
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="LFK" data-source="post: 6321172" data-attributes="member: 61050"><p>Eeeehhhhh.... I'm not sure about that. I mean, if C5 really means "suitable for 10th level parties" why not just make it C10?</p><p></p><p>I think the C½ creatures are a special case to accommodate 1st level. If we look at my threshold hypothesis C½ really just indicates monsters that a 1st level party is going to be fighting multiples of by default. Like let's say Orcs are C½ (100 xp) and Goblins are C½ (50 xp): both are suitable for a level 1 party to face in small groups, but orcs should be used in fewer numbers than goblins. Then let's say a hobgoblin or a gnoll is a C1 (200xp) creature. A level 1 party shouldn't be squaring off against more than one at a time, and a hobgoblin + 4 goblins would actually be a Very Hard encounter. A C2 Ogre is an inappropriate challenge (it does enough damage over its average combat lifespan to easily murder multiple PCs), and a Very Hard encounter all on its own.</p><p></p><p>C½, then, would only exist so that there's a C# lower than the lowest party level. Once you're level 2 the lower-than-party-level C#s start piling up, so there's no shortage of goons to send in clusters of various sizes.</p><p></p><p>That makes this, basically, a reworking of the 3e CR system, of a sort. Just ideally without the assumption of a party of 4 underpinning the math, and with C#s that accurately reflect the reality of the monster difficulty. (CR was needlessly obtuse to calculate, but the real nail in the coffin was the fact that more often than not the numbers were just plain wrong.)</p><p></p><p>I'm kinda extrapolating this from their stated goals, that they want the "number of DM options to grow, never shrink." My reading of that is that the platonic ideal is that the party is by and large always facing off against groups of creatures their C# and lower, by and large using quantity rather than level to adjust the challenge. So the C# isn't the "this is when an Ogre is an ideal challenge" but instead "this is the earliest Ogres should show up."</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="LFK, post: 6321172, member: 61050"] Eeeehhhhh.... I'm not sure about that. I mean, if C5 really means "suitable for 10th level parties" why not just make it C10? I think the C½ creatures are a special case to accommodate 1st level. If we look at my threshold hypothesis C½ really just indicates monsters that a 1st level party is going to be fighting multiples of by default. Like let's say Orcs are C½ (100 xp) and Goblins are C½ (50 xp): both are suitable for a level 1 party to face in small groups, but orcs should be used in fewer numbers than goblins. Then let's say a hobgoblin or a gnoll is a C1 (200xp) creature. A level 1 party shouldn't be squaring off against more than one at a time, and a hobgoblin + 4 goblins would actually be a Very Hard encounter. A C2 Ogre is an inappropriate challenge (it does enough damage over its average combat lifespan to easily murder multiple PCs), and a Very Hard encounter all on its own. C½, then, would only exist so that there's a C# lower than the lowest party level. Once you're level 2 the lower-than-party-level C#s start piling up, so there's no shortage of goons to send in clusters of various sizes. That makes this, basically, a reworking of the 3e CR system, of a sort. Just ideally without the assumption of a party of 4 underpinning the math, and with C#s that accurately reflect the reality of the monster difficulty. (CR was needlessly obtuse to calculate, but the real nail in the coffin was the fact that more often than not the numbers were just plain wrong.) I'm kinda extrapolating this from their stated goals, that they want the "number of DM options to grow, never shrink." My reading of that is that the platonic ideal is that the party is by and large always facing off against groups of creatures their C# and lower, by and large using quantity rather than level to adjust the challenge. So the C# isn't the "this is when an Ogre is an ideal challenge" but instead "this is the earliest Ogres should show up." [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Starter Set: Except 7
Top