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
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
Why 3.5 Worked
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="Celebrim" data-source="post: 7886651" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>Well, it wasn't completely meaningless. It suffered from being something that had to be estimated, and it wasn't always estimated well. But I would argue that it was better than the "Monster Level" system that proceeded it in most ways, and it was certainly more transparent. The one aspect of the older Monster Level system I preferred is that it had a more objective means of estimating CR. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is true, but it's one of those things that is both a negative and a positive. While it's true that different combinations of attacks and defenses could produce wildly different difficulties, that is something that goes back deep into D&D's history. Don't have a cleric? Undead that might be a pushover are difficult to deadly. Don't have a ranged attackers? Good luck with a dragon in an open area. Or consider a game like Nethack that is based on D&D. How tough is a poisonous monster? Well, do you have poison resistance? How tough is a cockatrice? Well, do you have reliable ranged attacks? Whether or not you have the right spell or the right defense for the situation determines whether you can face roll the creature or need to run away/get away fast.</p><p></p><p>The alternative though to having all that is a lack of tactical complexity. Remove all those edges and advantages which the party or the monster might have, and everything becomes a straight up damage race and the winner is the one that can simply burn through the opposition's stack of hit points the fastest. The result of that is a certain sameness that will get tiring in the long run.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>People in the thread asserted I needed to pay more attention to "suggested wealth by level" or carefully craft NPCs to threaten players. I didn't really. All I need to do is pay attention to what the party can or can't do. I don't really have to worry about being "too easy". Let the party face roll the opposition from time to time, just to get perspective on how powerful they've become. All I have to do is be careful to not throw something at them which isn't fair. In my experience, difficulty will come all on its own, when the party makes a bad choice or the dice have a run against them. I don't really have to push it that hard to make things challenging. Sooner or later they'll try to beat down something they should have kited or evaded, or separate the party, or put the squishy characters ahead of the meat shields, or try to kite something they should beat down, or fail a saving throw at the wrong time, or lose party cohesion, or panic, and then "moderate" difficulty becomes "hard" really quickly.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 7886651, member: 4937"] Well, it wasn't completely meaningless. It suffered from being something that had to be estimated, and it wasn't always estimated well. But I would argue that it was better than the "Monster Level" system that proceeded it in most ways, and it was certainly more transparent. The one aspect of the older Monster Level system I preferred is that it had a more objective means of estimating CR. This is true, but it's one of those things that is both a negative and a positive. While it's true that different combinations of attacks and defenses could produce wildly different difficulties, that is something that goes back deep into D&D's history. Don't have a cleric? Undead that might be a pushover are difficult to deadly. Don't have a ranged attackers? Good luck with a dragon in an open area. Or consider a game like Nethack that is based on D&D. How tough is a poisonous monster? Well, do you have poison resistance? How tough is a cockatrice? Well, do you have reliable ranged attacks? Whether or not you have the right spell or the right defense for the situation determines whether you can face roll the creature or need to run away/get away fast. The alternative though to having all that is a lack of tactical complexity. Remove all those edges and advantages which the party or the monster might have, and everything becomes a straight up damage race and the winner is the one that can simply burn through the opposition's stack of hit points the fastest. The result of that is a certain sameness that will get tiring in the long run. People in the thread asserted I needed to pay more attention to "suggested wealth by level" or carefully craft NPCs to threaten players. I didn't really. All I need to do is pay attention to what the party can or can't do. I don't really have to worry about being "too easy". Let the party face roll the opposition from time to time, just to get perspective on how powerful they've become. All I have to do is be careful to not throw something at them which isn't fair. In my experience, difficulty will come all on its own, when the party makes a bad choice or the dice have a run against them. I don't really have to push it that hard to make things challenging. Sooner or later they'll try to beat down something they should have kited or evaded, or separate the party, or put the squishy characters ahead of the meat shields, or try to kite something they should beat down, or fail a saving throw at the wrong time, or lose party cohesion, or panic, and then "moderate" difficulty becomes "hard" really quickly. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
Why 3.5 Worked
Top