D&D 5E The Challenge Rating Goldilocks Thread- Too Hot, Too Cold, or Just Right?

[Jfdlsjfd]

I find that even with the adjustment proposed in the DMG, the CR system for a single opponent tend to break. Using the spreadsheet, a "beyond deadly" encounter for 6 4th level PCs is a single CR8 monster. I could pit them against a single Assassin. If he successfully ambush them and does his 7d6 attack +4d6 sneak attack, +6 to hit, he'll probably drop one PC per round of successful attacking (roughly 75% chance). On the other hand he will probably not survive a second round (AC 15, 78 HP against 6 PC... if they realize he can one-shot characters they will go all out). So it's not deadly as in "is the encounter difficult or memorable?" but as in "he could one shot us, thankfully he dropped like a fly). And the same could be said for several other monster : either they have area attack that could result in TPK, or are sure to drop in one or two round, which doesn't provide a memorable fight. Deadly, maybe, but not memorable. I find the CR system working better if postulating roughly one foe per PC, but it's not always thematically appropriate. Since, using CR as a guideline can be useful.

One of the other thing I am not sure with CR is how to tweak the system when the PC practice their 5 minute work day... not because they cheese the game like madmen, but because the adventure calls for it (if they are running an investigative adventure where fights are few and they can get a long rest between them, being in a city with a rather lose time pressure. Going for the whole "daily amount of XP" in a single fight results in overpowered fights (or the PC plowing through low level opponents like the three musketeers did to the cardinal's guards...).

 

[Urriak Uruk]

Um, that's what CR does, so not sure how you're not using it? Also, KFC is the DMG CR encounter building rules neat, no ice.

It does, but because it's a group of 6, taking on a single enemy like the Astral Dreadnought is considered "hard," which translates to "actually pretty easy."

So I'm using encounter builders but I'm really measuring it against their XP per monster, not their CR. And it is more about the number of monsters, not their actual strength.

 

[Stalker0]

I find the CR system really cracks around 5th level players, and by 8-9 it breaks in half. I would love a CR system that's good, but the current system overestimates challenges so much I don't find it very useful.

 

[Oofta]

I find the CR system really cracks around 5th level players, and by 8-9 it breaks in half. I would love a CR system that's good, but the current system overestimates challenges so much I don't find it very useful.

Not that you're the only one saying this, but statements like this kind of baffle me. The numbers don't work for you any more? Tweak the numbers. Ignore the multiplier. Take your final number and reduce it by a percentage. Drop the CR of the monsters a couple of points or increase the level of the PCs. Adjust for your group until it works again.

Between all the variations no system is going to work for every group, but I've gotten it to work relatively well up to 20th level. But even with the same options, roughly same number of encounters, same number of players I had to adjust by group. One group of more casual players was okay with pretty much base assumptions, the other needed to be run at 150%. But it was simple - just increasing my target number worked up to level 20.

Does it work exactly as written out of the box for every group? I don't see how that would be feasible. I just think it's incredibly easy to modify.

P.S. In my experience solo monsters have never really worked in any edition unless you have a really small group.

 

[Li Shenron]

1. I use CR as written, and I find it helpful. (You use CR without modifications, or minimal modifications)

7. I am dumb and did not understand the question.

I decided to vote option 1. but I didn't exactly understand what does it mean to modify CR... I have the MM and VGtM books, and they give me one CR for every creature. Did you mean to ask whether I disagree with the CR values in those books, or did you mean if I disagree with the encounter building rules for combining monsters into a group for an encounter?

Anyway, normally I run older-editions adventures in 5e, and I try to convert them "on the fly" and play as they are... When the adventure has a combat encounter with certain monsters, I look into the 5e MM and check what is their CR, and then normally I just make sure it's not above the characters level.

So if for example an adventure gives me 1 ogre + 3 orcs, I check what are their CR in 5e: ogres have CR 2 and orcs have CR 1/2, so if the PCs are not yet at 2nd level, I replace the ogre with something else that has e.g. CR 1. I don't always do that though, sometimes I just let it be, as long as it's maybe only +1 or even +2, but perhaps I soften the encounter in some other way. That's the only way I use CR... in fact, I don't understand what is the point of fractional CRs, since I don't think the DMG never tells you to add CRs together, but rather add XPs.

Next in fact, you're supposed to add XPs together for all monsters in the encounter, since more monsters obviously means a more difficult combat, and check if you like the result. In the example above the total XP would be 450 + 3 x 100 = 750. That's actually a near-deadly encounter for a party of four 2nd level PCs, so if I am afraid this is too much, I decrease the amount of monsters, in this case maybe remove an orc or two.

 

[ChaosOS]

CR in my experience is fine, but items, optimization, and player skill make for big variations in its effectiveness. I'm surprised that people consider the Oni to be weak, because Cone of Cold is a pretty nasty spell. 36 damage really chunks down a party, and if the Oni's CR was much lower then you'd end up just one-shotting anyone who failed the save. With the Oni's maneuverability, it's not unreasonable for it to land on 3 PCs. I think a lot of this though is they upward adjusted monsters with high offensive CRs to ensure that nobody gets surprised by one-shots. Ogres IIRC are another example of this.

 

[Prakriti]

I find the CR system really cracks around 5th level

It actually breaks completely at level 5, because CR increases linearly, while PC power level experiences a huge spike at level 5: Melee characters gain Extra Attack, effectively doubling their DPR, and casters gain access to Fireball and other game-changing spells. CR doesn't account for this huge spike in damage output, and that's why the PCs can mow through so many more "hard" and "deadly" encounters at level 5 than they could at level 3 or 4.

 

[FireLance]

I find the CR system really cracks around 5th level players, and by 8-9 it breaks in half. I would love a CR system that's good, but the current system overestimates challenges so much I don't find it very useful.

I've said it before in this thread, and I'll say it again. I think part of the problem is that the CR system assumes that the PCs have no magic items. As stated in the sidebar on Page 136 of XGtE, "Characters and monsters are built to face each other without the help of magic items".

And although the same sidebar is quick to provide the assurance that "As DM, you never have to worry about awarding magic items just so the characters can keep up with the campaign's threats", it fails to acknowledge the opposite problem, which is that with every magic item given out, the DM may find that the campaign's threats are increasingly unable to keep up with the PCs.

However, I suppose in the grand scheme of things, the worst outcome is that the PCs win fights easily, which is preferable to a TPK.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

All CR does is tell you if encounter A is more difficult than encounter B. What challenge rating a particular party is capable of handling is going to vary widely between parties, depending on player skill, class mix, equipment and a whole bunch of other factors.

It's never been a rule, only a guideline, and it's up to the DM to decide what challenge level is appropriate for the party.

 

[akr71]

i'm not sure how to answer. I definitely 100% glance at CR to know the relative strength of a monster, but I've never used it to actually calculate anything.

Yep, this is kinda where I am. I use KFC & the D&D Beyond encounter builder to give me a list of environment appropriate creatures when I'm lacking inspiration. I set a CR Range and an environment and go from there.

I find it uninteresting to always have level appropriate or fair encounters - within reason. For an adventure on rails, that's fine, but for sandbox campaigns it kinda ruins immersion. If I have decided that there is a monster that definitely outclasses the party, I had better make sure I telegraph that well ahead of time. If they search out the dragon lair at the top of the mountain when only level 5, that's on them, not me.