D&D 5E Who wrote these CRs?

[OB1]

What you are suggesting here amounts to, "Since the current CR system is broken, just amp up the CR until the encounter is a proper challenge." That's not the CR system working, it's me fixing the broken CR system.

Or perhaps the problem is that your PCs are over focusing on maximizing combat abilities when they level up.

As with magic items giving real bonus's that make subsequent combats easier, constantly choosing the DPR optimal options for PCs, especially when an entire party of PCs does so, leads to a real and meaningful increase in power of that party against level appropriate challenges.

5e does not require players to maximize the damage output of their characters in order to have a good chance at succeeding at combat encounters. If you prefer to remove as much randomness as possible from those encounters, you can do so, but then why complain afterwards that combat is too easy? It's what you chose!

If that's not what you want, feel free to not always increase your character's primary stat, or take a high DPR feat, and instead choose things that make your character more versatile or interesting to you. As an added bonus, it may also make combat a bit more challenging!

 

[Maxperson]

Or perhaps the problem is that your PCs are over focusing on maximizing combat abilities when they level up.

As with magic items giving real bonus's that make subsequent combats easier, constantly choosing the DPR optimal options for PCs, especially when an entire party of PCs does so, leads to a real and meaningful increase in power of that party against level appropriate challenges.

5e does not require players to maximize the damage output of their characters in order to have a good chance at succeeding at combat encounters. If you prefer to remove as much randomness as possible from those encounters, you can do so, but then why complain afterwards that combat is too easy? It's what you chose!

If that's not what you want, feel free to not always increase your character's primary stat, or take a high DPR feat, and instead choose things that make your character more versatile or interesting to you. As an added bonus, it may also make combat a bit more challenging!

That's an interesting point. I might be inclined to go with it, except that the complaints of broken CR are so widespread that it's hard to credit optimization with it all. That is especially true when you consider that even those arguing that CR isn't broken admit that fights are incredibly easy. They just argue that the easy is intended.

I don't think maximizing damage output is the reason that CR is broken.

 

[Sunseeker]

Or perhaps the problem is that your PCs are over focusing on maximizing combat abilities when they level up.

It shouldn't matter if they do. I'm sure my players are optimizing, power-gaming fools, but that's beside the point.

As with magic items giving real bonus's that make subsequent combats easier, constantly choosing the DPR optimal options for PCs, especially when an entire party of PCs does so, leads to a real and meaningful increase in power of that party against level appropriate challenges.

Again though there's a reason magic items were reduced to +3 in this edition. If the game can't account for a +/-3 variance in its number then it is either too tightly wound or not tightly enough. Somewhere, the math is off.

5e does not require players to maximize the damage output of their characters in order to have a good chance at succeeding at combat encounters. If you prefer to remove as much randomness as possible from those encounters, you can do so, but then why complain afterwards that combat is too easy? It's what you chose!

No, it does not, but this is still besides the point.

If that's not what you want, feel free to not always increase your character's primary stat, or take a high DPR feat, and instead choose things that make your character more versatile or interesting to you. As an added bonus, it may also make combat a bit more challenging!

What if...maybe...the most interesting thing I want to do with my character is make them hit harder?

If 5th doesn't require you to optimize in order to succeed, it shouldn't likewise require you to un-optimize for you to feel challenged. As my original point suggests: CR is not aimed at the "middle of the road" but it is apparently aimed at "the absolute bottom".

 

[OB1]

What if...maybe...the most interesting thing I want to do with my character is make them hit harder?

If 5th doesn't require you to optimize in order to succeed, it shouldn't likewise require you to un-optimize for you to feel challenged. As my original point suggests: CR is not aimed at the "middle of the road" but it is apparently aimed at "the absolute bottom".

If you make them hit harder then combat will be easier against a similar foe. That's the point. Now I get the argument that some people want CR to reflect a dpr optimized character, but if it did so, that would make the game much more difficult for people who don't optimize and also would reduce the choices available to players to have an effective PC.

Wizards has chosen to play to the middle to make the base game easier for casual and new players and expecting that hardcore players will be able to hack the system to get to the difficulty they want (if that is what they want). It's much easier for an experienced DM to up difficulty than a new or casual DM to lower it (without fudging dice rolls)

If Wizards chose to make CR reflect DPR optimized characters, then there would only be one path to play the game. Make your character as combat effective as possible. Instead, I can have my Forest Gnome Sorcerer 4/ Fey Pact Warlock 1 Tavern Brawler with 14 Cha still be effective in combat and a heck load of fun out of it.

 

[Maxperson]

If you make them hit harder then combat will be easier against a similar foe. That's the point. Now I get the argument that some people want CR to reflect a dpr optimized character, but if it did so, that would make the game much more difficult for people who don't optimize and also would reduce the choices available to players to have an effective PC.

No. What people are asking for is for CR to actually work right. A non-optimized group should be challenged by a like CR creature, like RAW says. An optimized group should be able to go +2 or +3 over in order to be really challenged. +4 or +5 for an encounter that could wipe an optimized group of good players, but maybe not.

Wizards has chosen to play to the middle to make the base game easier for casual and new players and expecting that hardcore players will be able to hack the system to get to the difficulty they want (if that is what they want). It's much easier for an experienced DM to up difficulty than a new or casual DM to lower it (without fudging dice rolls)

They didn't take the middle ground. They took the ground somewhere in the middle of extremely easy and a challenge for the non-optimized group.

 

[Sunseeker]

If you make them hit harder then combat will be easier against a similar foe. That's the point. Now I get the argument that some people want CR to reflect a dpr optimized character, but if it did so, that would make the game much more difficult for people who don't optimize and also would reduce the choices available to players to have an effective PC.

Wizards has chosen to play to the middle to make the base game easier for casual and new players and expecting that hardcore players will be able to hack the system to get to the difficulty they want (if that is what they want). It's much easier for an experienced DM to up difficulty than a new or casual DM to lower it (without fudging dice rolls)

If Wizards chose to make CR reflect DPR optimized characters, then there would only be one path to play the game. Make your character as combat effective as possible. Instead, I can have my Forest Gnome Sorcerer 4/ Fey Pact Warlock 1 Tavern Brawler with 14 Cha still be effective in combat and a heck load of fun out of it.

I'm not sure what argument you're talking to but it wasn't mine.

I expect highly optimized characters to require a higher challenge. But I shouldn't have to double the CR, essentially turning the CR equation from CR=APL to CR=APLx2 in order to provide them a challenge. My point remains that CR is not aimed at the "averagely skilled group" but at the absolute lowest common denominator.

 

[Minigiant]

Here's the thing.

Dungeons and Dragons 5th edition was built to work for dungeon crawling

It uses the attrition format. Thus a monster whose CR is equal to your level is designed not to win because you are suppose to go area to area, dealing with challenges. It's not destined for big flashy boss fights. D&D5E is designed to make epic fights by making an easy fight hard due to lack of resources or the desire to not spend the ones you have.

If you fight only monsters of your CR and you have 3 allies, you're supposed to do this 6 times. A monster with CR=Level is supposed to only suck 10-20% of your expected usage of your party's combat resources.

Therefore Challenge Rating is based on Possible Resource Drain not actual challenge.

If anything, it's a misnomer. It should be Resource Rating.

 

[OB1]

I expect highly optimized characters to require a higher challenge. But I shouldn't have to double the CR, essentially turning the CR equation from CR=APL to CR=APLx2 in order to provide them a challenge.

But doesn't that depend on what level you are at? A CR2 creature against a level 1 party is double, but CR11 against a level 10 party is just 10% higher. And levels are definitely Mathley linear not quadratic. That's why it's reasonable for a level 20 party to take on a CR 30 BBEG. It's similar to a level 2 party taking on a CR3.

And I also stand by my point. If you choose options to make yourself better at combat, it shouldn't be a surprise that you are then, in fact, better at combat.

 

[MostlyDm]

No. What people are asking for is for CR to actually work right. A non-optimized group should be challenged by a like CR creature, like RAW says. An optimized group should be able to go +2 or +3 over in order to be really challenged. +4 or +5 for an encounter that could wipe an optimized group of good players, but maybe not.



They didn't take the middle ground. They took the ground somewhere in the middle of extremely easy and a challenge for the non-optimized group.

+4 or +5 party level in CR being a devastating threat is just. Not realistic once you get decently high level. Bounded Accuracy just isn't going to work that way.

Take existing bonuses and add +X to all rolls, DCs, AC, etc. for all monsters and players. Have X be equal to level or CR, or maybe 1/2 level or CR.

Kill Bounded Accuracy and you'll have the difficulty ramp you're looking for.

 

[Sunseeker]

Here's the thing.

Dungeons and Dragons 5th edition was built to work for dungeon crawling

From the impression this thread gives and the other games I see people talking about I have to ask: does anyone actually play D&D this way?

I don't care how Gygax designed the game but my impression is that NOONE actually plays the game that way anymore.