Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 7007575" data-attributes="member: 6785785">I think that when it comes to default expectations, the rules assume parity in player and DM experience. So there is no assumption that the DM must come up with clever tactics or ways to make monsters more effective; instead, that is determined by the experience and tactical acumen of the players. The books assume everyone involved with have an average level of play ability. Once you add in optional rules like feats and multi-classing, and players who've played over many editions and have all kinds of skill when it comes to RPGs, then the DM likely has to adjust things a bit no matter what. As a side note, it's kind of becoming increasingly clear to me that the options that we tend to consider "advanced" seem to be almost the opposite; they make the game so much easier that it seems they should be for new players, and that players who want things to be tougher should forgo those options. Kind of an odd phenomenon. I agree with you. To me, CR is a rough guide at best. I know many folks who frequent these boards use the CR effectively in encounter design and they seem to stand by the system as a whole...and that's great. It's never really worked for me....I tend to work by trial and error and instinct when it comes to designing encounters for my players. So for me, that little Challenge Rating bit in the Monster Manual is a realy rough approximation of a monster's general toughness, and that's about it.</blockquote>

Verification